Okay. Hello everyone. Um, I'm calling
the regular meeting of the Rosstown
Council Thursday, August 13, 2026
to order.
Town Manager Johnson, has the agenda
been posted?
>> Yes, Mayor, it has. And we uh staff is
requesting a um slight change to the
agenda. We'd like to move the third
design review item which is number 17
regarding 18 Sir Francis Drake. We'd
like to move it uh to the um up to after
9B.
So it would be the third design review
item in a row. Some things have been
worked out so we think it can be go
through pretty quickly.
>> Great. Does anyone have any objection to
that?
>> Okay. Thank you. Disclosure of exparte
communications on items where the town
council acts in an adjudicatory or quas
judicial capacity. Anything to disclose?
>> Hi, Bill.
>> Yes. Hi, Julie.
>> Number four, open time for public
expression. This is limited to three
minutes per speaker on Wait, do I need
to ask Bill where he is and why he's not
here?
>> No. Okay, great. Yes, I'm Should I make
a statement? I'm in Seattle. That's why
I'm not attending. I am at 441
University Street, Seattle, which is a
Fairmont Olympic Hotel. And there is I
am in room 358. And there is no one here
with me.
>> Thank you, Belle. So, we'll be um
calling um roll call for the votes. All
right. Number four, open time for public
expression. This is limited to three
minutes per speaker on item items not on
the agenda. Anyone in the chamber for
public comment?
Dear Mayor and M Mc McMillan and Ross
town council members, first of all,
please agendaize FOR's restitution to
the town of Ross over its failed,
flawed, and ultimately withdrawn ballot
initiative.
I am speaking tonight to address a grave
concern regarding the integrity of our
upcoming town elections. The friends of
Ross Firehouse for originally
established a as a ballot measure
committee has transitioned into a
political machine that is leveraging its
resources to provide an unfair advantage
to two specific candidates, Bob Herz and
Paul Rosler. The toothpaste is out of
the tube, so to speak. Forth has
utilized its mass mailing list, a list
compiled from residents who signed a
petition or donated to save our local
fire station to now and for the next 80
plus days broadcasting endorsements from
Mr. Herps and Mr. Rosler. This email
list was not obtained through legitimate
campaign purchase. It was harvested
under the guise of a single issue civic
initiative. As a donor myself, I can
state clearly that my contribution was
intended to support public safety, not
for political engineering.
Because Mr. Herp serves as president of
FORF, he and Mr. Rossler have exclusive
access to this database of engaged
voters. Other candidates in the race do
not have the same access, creating a
fundamentally unlevel playing field.
This with pardon me, creating a
fundamentally unlevel playing field.
This use of specialized voter data
without the explicit consent of our
citizens on the list and without parody
for other candidates undermines the
democratic process in Ross. I ask the
council to consider the following points
regarding the situation. First,
potential campaign finance violations.
The council should con inquire whether
the mass communications constitute a
coordinated campaign contribution to the
Herps and Rosler campaigns rather than
an independent expenditure.
transparency and data acquisition. There
must be a full public disclosure
regarding how force email list was
acquired and compiled and whether its
use for candidate advocacy complies with
the FPPC mass electronic and disclosure
rules. Finally, restoration of fairness.
We need to understand who authorized,
wrote, and distributed these endorsement
emails and whether these two candidates
participated in those decisions as this
changes the legal characterization of
the organizational organization
spending. The residents of Ross deserve
an election this November that is
transparent and fair. As Ross citizens,
we did not provide our contact
information to a ballot measure
committee so they can be weaponized by
force officers for their own political
gain. I urge the council and town
attorney to investigate these
discrepancy to ensure our local
governments remains unc accountable to
the facts and its citizenry and
therefore allow the other two candidates
similar access to townwide email list.
Michael Rosenbound, 14 Avenue.
>> Thank you. Anyone else?
>> Hello.
» We'll see if I'm doing it right. Did I
do good this time? I'll even introduce
myself.
I'm Diane Redden, 39 Willow Avenue. Good
evening, everyone. And I just want to
say that we had an age friendly meeting
here
this afternoon or this morning really
and we talked about the intercom system
and we're all for it and um you know
here here and uh we have a couple things
planned
going forward for age friendly but what
we're trying to do is get the word out
to Kentfield
and invite them into our age friendly
group and If anybody has any brilliant
ideas on how to do that, I would love to
hear because the post office there is
only is not open until 10:00 in the
morning. So, and not very many people
use that post office. It's not like
ours. So, besides Woodland Market, I do
not have
any way to get a hold of those people.
» Thank you. Anyone else in the chamber?
Anyone online, Zach?
>> No one online. Mayor,
>> thank you. So, the mayor's report, um,
we had a special council meeting on
August 4 to first retain Gendzer
Architects who prepared the citizens
advisory committee's gorgeous conceptual
concept presented April 29. Earlier this
week, staff had a kickoff meeting with
Gensler to begin the process of amending
the facilities master plan and
developing other information, including
costs. The goal is to complete this by
late October to allow for a general
obligation bond election in 2027. We
will be holding frequent council
meetings to inform the public, gather
public comment, and make decisions. At
that meeting, we also accepted the
withdrawal of the fourth initiative from
the November 3rd, 2026 ballot that would
have compelled the town to have an
operating fire station within town
limits with no associated funding.
Finally, we approved and signed the
ballot argument to renew the Ross Valley
Paramedic Authority parcel tax, which
will be called Measure U, starting in
fiscal year 2728 at $107.50
per year, adjusted up to $4 per year for
four years.
On July 27, there was a small vegetation
fire in Mil Valley between Hillside
Avenue and the Bleedale Ridge called the
Hillside Fire. It was contained quickly
at 1.5 acres due to fast emergency
responses and effective vegetation
management in the area. There were
robust responses from 11 fire engines
including from Southern Marin fire,
Marin County Fire, two Tamilas Tamas
fire crews and Calire along with mutual
aid from Tibberon and Central Marin
fire. Three battalion chiefs, four
aircraft, one CalFire air attack plane
from Santa Rosa serving as the air
traffic controller, two CalFire air
tankers, one from Santa Rosa and one
from Mendescino, making one drop a fire
retardant. The PG& funded firefighting
Blackhawk helicopter stationed at
Nosfield in Neado, arriving seven
minutes after dispatch and making seven
water drops sourced from Cord Madera and
Phoenix Lake. a transport dozer carrying
a bulldozer, two water tenders, each
carrying 2,00 to 2500 gallons of water,
Mil Valley Police, and one paramedic
ambulance. The fire moved at a slow rate
of spread through vegetation that had
been treated by Southern Marin Fire and
the Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority.
Southern Marin Fire believes the
firereak work and other preventative
measures in the area over the past
several years help limit the fire
spread. And then I have a link to um a
note from Southern Marine Fire about
other preparation that they did back to
school. It's hard to believe that summer
is ending and school is already
starting. Ross school begins next week
on August 19 and Branson classes begin
on August 24. Finally, live on the
comments thanks to RPOA and the town
will be next Friday, August 21st with
Super Diamond, a Neil Diamond tribute
band, Come Here, Sweet Caroline, and
other classic Neil Diamond hits,
council committee, and liaison reports.
Anybody?
>> Uh, just a report from the post office
today. Um the most the main concern that
I heard was um a concern about the
number of vehicles uh in the street when
there are building projects. And
specifically there were two building
projects in this one neighborhood um as
the neighborhood of Ames and um a
request that when we um uh issue permits
that we pay attention to conditions for
parking.
I think that still doesn't help if you
have three cement trucks at one time,
but uh but we can do our best trying to
make sure there's a parking and and
construction plan.
» Anybody else? Bill, do you have
anything?
>> No, I don't.
>> Okay. Staff and community reports. Um
Ross Property Owners Association.
Okay,
good evening. My name is Peter Solar. I
live at uh 15 West Road here in Moss and
I'm representing the RPOA tonight. This
is just to give an update for the month.
Uh first and foremost, want to thank you
for the uh contribution of uh 25,500
from the town. That's that's uh that's
been that was submitted in July and it's
already been cashed. We appreciate it.
Obviously, uh as you mentioned though,
we are uh uh hosting a live on the
commons event on the 21st of August. The
entertainment will be Super Diamond uh
which is a Neil Diamond um cover band.
There will be uh uh food trucks and
activities for kids and also the
obviously all the restaurants that are
in the area benefit from this. So,
they're super excited.
We are uh we're hosting a a candidates
night coming up. We're in the process of
trying to find a venue and a uh a Zoom
coordinator. This will happen sometime
in October.
So, more more to come on that. Uh you
may notice when you go to the Ross prop
uh post office, we have new lights and
um we think that's been a we get a lot
of compliments so far and and we we're
really appreciative of that. Uh we're
looking at potentially uh either fixing
up the lights in the back or potentially
replacing those. So we're in the process
of of figuring out what's the best uh
solution there. We'll get back to you on
that. Uh there's also an age friendly um
uh tour of Bucks Institute on September
22nd coming up.
And then um
the last couple things we did um uh Ross
Auxiliary just announced two new
co-presidents, Gabrielle Gantis and
Taylor Porter.
And then the last thing is obviously the
flowers that are on um near the common.
They're doing great and we're continuing
to watering those and maintaining all
that all the plants that are in that
area. So that's it. Thank you.
>> Great. Thank you. And I understand you
had a meeting Monday. I'm sorry I missed
it. I did not receive an email or or the
agenda, so I'm sorry I wasn't there.
>> There was a meeting today,
>> Monday night, our POA. Yeah. Thank you.
>> Um, town manager Johnson. Uh, thank you.
Um, good evening, Mayor and Council
members. I'd like to welcome back our
recreation manager, Moren Borthwick,
from Family Leave. She is zooming into
the meeting tonight from her home. And
I'd also like to give a big thank you to
our two other wreck employees who really
gave them gave it their all and um held
down the fort. So that would include um
recreation clerk u Mallerie Baron who um
doubled her hours in order to assist the
recreation department in the town
continue to provide um excellent
customer service to residents. And I'd
like to give a big thank you to Wyatt
Man who so abley served as interim wreck
manager since last April and through a
very busy um time of the year for
programming and events for the
department. Wyatt is here this evening
and I hope we can all congratulate him
and thank him for a job well done.
Uh, in other staffing news, yes, the
dreaded day arrived and our esteemed
public works director, Rich Simonich,
left us for retirement. On day 10, we
are surviving, but definitely feel his
absence. Thankfully, our civic center
project manager, David Kelly, agreed to
fill in as interim director, and we were
able to hire a knowledgeable consultant,
John Mo, to handle the town engineer
functions, that portion of um the
director position. This week, our town
clerk, Zach, and I started a robust
recruitment process with a professional
HR firm, which will hopefully, fingers
crossed, result in interviews in mid
October. So, we are going to have this
interim period where we're just all
doing our best to work together as a
team to address resident um issues and
also prepare for what is uh projected to
be a very wet winter. Um, and that also
includes Anthony and Zach, our other
Zach in the um public works department
to prepare for the the rainy season.
Uh, from the police department, as the
mayor mentioned, RAW school starts on
Tuesday with Branson School soon after,
and we would like to remind the
community to remember to share the road
with bicyclists and children walking to
school. Ross PD officers will be
enforcing traffic laws. Please plan
ahead and give yourself plenty of time.
If your child rides a bike to school,
please have a conversation about
following the rules of the road.
The filing period closed yesterday for
residents wishing to run for election to
the town council. There are four four
candidates.
The um advisory design review um group
meeting this month will be held on
Tuesday, August 25th at 6 p.m. in the
council chambers. That's a change of
their usual time and it's to allow for a
quorum so they can meet. Um, and
speaking of quorum, um, due to a, uh, we
will we will have an absence on a
vacancy on the ADR and, uh, the Ross
Council is seeking a volunteer to fill
one opening on ADR for a three-year
term. Serving on the ADR is a unique
experience to make a positive
contribution to the design and
appearance of the community and help
neighbors come together on development
issues. The application is available
online and the due date to apply has
been extended to August 24th. We would
like to thank the current ADR members
that have worked to make the ADR group a
helpful forum for providing staff
applicants and the town council with
feedback during the development review
process. Mark Krishnet, the chair, he's
the outgoing member. Um Joey Buckingham,
Mark Fritz, Steven Sutro, and Laura Der.
We give them big thanks for all their
work they do throughout the year. And um
just finally,
I'm going to be going uh back and forth
between my office and zooming in. I have
a a cough and I don't want to be any
more distracting to the council. So
that's what Don't be alarmed. I'll be
coming back in. Um and that's it. Thank
you for the opportunity to report.
>> Thank you. Consent agenda. Does any
member of the public wish to remove any
item from the consent agenda?
Anybody online?
>> No one online. Mayor,
>> any council member want to remove
something? Okay. Could we please have a
motion to approve the consent agenda?
>> I'll move that we con uh approve the
consent calendar.
>> Second.
» Motion by council member Dalling. Second
by Mayor Prom Robbins.
>> Yes.
>> Mayor McMillan.
>> Yes. Mayor Potm Robbins,
>> yes.
>> Council member Kercher,
>> yes.
>> Council member Dalling,
>> yes.
>> Council member Salter,
>> yes.
>> Motion passes unanimously.
>> Thank you.
We are moving on to the public hearing
on planning projects 92 Glenwood Avenue,
design review, nonconformity permit, and
demolition permit, and town council
consideration of adoption of resolution
number 2645 approving the project.
subject to conditions. Roberta,
>> Alex.
>> Good evening, mayor and council members.
Uh, tonight the applicant at 92 Glenwood
Avenue is requesting town council's
consideration for designer view and a
demolition permit. Uh, the project is
proposing to replace the existing
stuckle with cedar shingles throughout
the exterior of the house. Uh during the
meeting at the uh at the ADR meeting
July 21st, all the 80 members were in
support of the project and staff request
that the town council consider adopting
resolution 2645 approving design review
and a demolition permits
» questions from council.
>> No.
>> Um went away. Bill, are you still there?
He's still online. Mayor,
>> he is.
>> Yeah, his camera's just off.
>> Okay, great. All right. Um,
does anyone um from the public wish to
make a statement?
Anyone online?
Does the applicant wish to make any
statement?
Okay, then we'll bring it back for um
discussion and a motion, please.
>> So, I just add a comment. We got a
letter about the shingles. Um but the um
the owner showed me the shingles. They
have they're they're CalFire approved
and they have some special backing. So I
think that it's fine to go ahead with
this.
>> Yeah. Robera, did you want to add
anything to that?
>> That's correct. It's CalFire and WOOI
approved. So in terms of if you see the
shingles, what you're really want to
look at is the assembly. Um there should
be other
uh fire resistant backings
connected to that siding. That way if
the shingles burn off there is something
that stops burning.
» Great. Um any further discussion?
>> I move we approve a resolution
uh 2645.
>> A second.
Motion by Mayor Prom Robbins, second by
council member Dalling. Mayor McMillan,
>> yes.
>> Mayor Prom Robbins,
>> yes.
>> Council member Kercher,
>> yes.
>> Council member Dalling,
>> yes.
>> Council member Salter,
>> yes.
>> Motion passes unanimously.
>> And we're moving on to 98 Laurel Grove
Avenue. Design review and nonconformity
permit and town council consideration of
adoption of resolution number 2646
approving the project subject to
conditions. Uh good evening, mayor,
council members. Uh tonight, the
applicant at 98 L Grove is requesting
town council's consideration for design
review and a nonconformity permit. The
project is proposing to expand the
existing guest house by 396 ft. Uh
increasing the total floor area for that
guest house from 38 385 ft to 781 ft.
The project also includes a new trellis,
a patio, and retaining walls. At the ADR
meeting on July 21st, all the AD ADR
members were in support of the project
since the project is not exacerbating
the existing nonconformity.
Staff request that the town council will
consider adopting resolution 2646
approving design review and a
non-conformity permit. Thank you.
>> Council member questions?
No.
Um, any comment from the public on this
item?
Um, does the applicant wish to make a
statement? You certainly don't have to.
>> Thank you.
We like that.
Okay. Um, we'll bring it back for any
further discussion or a motion.
>> I move that we adopt resolution number
2646.
Second.
>> Motion by council member Ding. Second by
Mayor Prom Robbins. Mayor McMillan.
>> Yes.
>> Mayor Prom Robbins.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Kercher.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Dowling.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Salter.
>> Yes.
>> Motion passes unanimously.
>> Thank you. Now we're moving on to 17A,
which we're taking a little bit out of
order. um
which is 18 Sir Francis Drake Boulevard
design review nonconformity permit
demolition permit and a variance and
town council consideration of adoption
of resolution number 2644 approving the
project subject to conditions
mayor council members uh tonight the uh
applicant and homeowner at 18 sir
Francis Drake is requesting town
council's consideration for designer
view demolition permit, a nonconformity
permit, and a variance. The project is
proposing to renovate the existing
residence by replacing the existing
sighting with horizontal cedar sighting
with also stone veneer base. Additional
site improvements include reconfiguring
and reduction of a swimming pool, the
relocation of a equipment, construction
of a new patio, and a new gravel
driveway. Uh at the ADR meeting on June
16th, the ADR members were in support of
the project with minor modifications. Uh
the members recommended that the patio
be located 5 ft from the side property
line uh to use dark a darker base
material and also more of a natural
color palette. The applicant revised the
plans accordingly and also the members
also supported the pool equipment's lo
relocation because of the proximity to
Sir Francis Drake. Uh staff request that
the town council consider adopting
resolution 2644 approving designer
review a non-conformity permit
demolition permit and a variance.
>> Questions council members?
>> Um any public comment on this item?
» My name is Mark Converse. I'm a neighbor
at 18 franch. I just want to clarify I
talked to Alex that was that was the
item on the the design review was a
three-unit building and that's been
rescended to a two-un building. I just
want to confirm that's the case for
public record, right?
>> Uh that's correct.
>> Okay. And then the the other
improvements like there's going to be
other stuff done as we discussed that'll
be further permits, right? For instance,
excavation permits and those kind of
things, right? Because there's some
other like for instance there's a
there's not not been a geotech survey
done and that would be part of the
building permits. That's is that
correct?
>> That would be submitted during the
building permits.
>> During the Okay. All right. That's it.
We support the project. It's it's well
overdue.
>> Thank you. Do you want to state your
name?
>> Um Mark Converse and I live at 16. Thank
you very much. Next door. Thank you. Any
other public comment?
Um does the applicant wish to make a
statement? Are they online?
Ross. It's Ross McKenna.
>> Yes. Um,
>> you don't have
>> Ross or Studio J.
I love both of you to talk.
» Hi. Can anyone hear me? This is Richard
from Studio J Architecture.
>> Yeah. Hi, we hear you.
>> Okay, great. Hi. Um, nothing really to
add other than uh confirming the
conditions of approval for the flat roof
um for the neighbor on the other side.
Um, otherwise I think if everyone's
uh approves the project, we'd like to
move forward and uh that's all.
>> Thank you.
>> Okay. Well, we'll move it back to
council for any discussion or a motion.
Well, I move that we adopt resolution
number 2644.
Second
>> motion by council member Dowling, second
by Mayor Prom Robbins. Mayor McMillan,
>> yes.
>> Mayor Prom Robbins,
>> yes.
>> Council member Kercher,
>> yes.
>> Council member Dowling,
>> yes.
>> Council member Salter,
>> yes.
>> Motion passes unanimously.
>> Thank you. Now we're moving to the
administrative agenda item number 10.
town council to receive a presentation
from team civex regarding the planning,
evaluation, public information, and
community engagement process associated
with potential local revenue measures
and discuss how these services may
assist the town as it continues
evaluating potential financing options
for implementation of the Ross Civic
Center facilities master plan and
related municipal capital improvements.
Christa,
>> thank you. Thank you, mayor. Um the item
before you this evening is um uh we are
continuing our council education series
related to the town's civic center
redevelopment project. You may recall
that on April 2nd, the council received
a presentation from Fieldman Rolap, the
town's municipal financial adviser,
regarding the town's financial
condition, budget outlook, and capacity
to support debt service associated with
implementation of the facility's master
plan. And then on July 9th, the council
received a presentation regarding
alternative project delivery and
procurement methods for implementation
of the Ross Civic Center project and
also discussed the town's priorities
regarding project delivery, procurement,
schedule, cost certainty, and risk
allocation.
In the third part of this educational
series, Joy Kumer
partner with a firm called Team Civics
will give the council a presentation
providing an initial overview of the
feasibility and process for a potential
local funding measure, including the
available election timing, key strategic
considerations, and recommended next
steps and decision points. Thank you.
Oh, there we go. I'm so sorry.
>> Oh, excuse me, Joy. Let's just give us
Could you just give us a second to make
sure we get your
>> Oh, yes.
» No, no.
>> It'll take a moment.
Pardon me.
The challenge is always getting the Zoom
to
combine with the PowerPoint. So, thank
you for your patience.
Okay.
We'll try this again.
There we go.
Uh again, Joykum. I'm one of the
partners at Team Civics. We are a
communication and election strategy
firm.
» Oh, thank you. Thank you. Oh, perfect.
Uh and we now have a presentation. Um, I
work with cities, school districts,
counties, um, and other public entities
as they review the process to place a
potential measure on the ballot. Um, we
look at exploring feasibility. So,
tonight I'm just here to talk a little
bit about uh, past election trends in
the town of Ross, as well as looking
forward at potential opportunities that
might be available and some things to be
thinking about as you consider that.
work.
>> So, just a little bit about the
facilities master planning timing. Uh,
we know that you're in the process of
completing the facilities master plan
amendment. Uh, looking at that project
scope and the costs that are being uh,
determined and associated with that, I
had an opportunity to take a look at
some of the previous materials. Um,
potential funding options that are
available to uh, help with that project.
And then tonight again I'm just here to
talk about the planning and process and
election timing.
So a little bit about our firm. Uh we
are one of the leaders in helping
prepare and uh help cities pass
potential um tax revenue measures. We
have an over 90% success rate um on all
sorts of measures all around the state
of California. We're often known as good
team players. uh we sort of work well
with the other existing people on your
team as you're moving forward. Um uh we
work with Fieldman quite often in cities
around the state as they're doing the
financial advisor part of it and we're
helping with the communications. Um our
emphasis is really on customer service
and responsiveness. I come to meetings.
I actually live in Oakland so it's not a
bad drive for me. Uh we really try to
pay attention. I know how ballot
measures work. I know about election
timing, but you know your community. So,
it is always a team effort and that's
important that we're working together.
And of course, we always have individual
attention from each of our partners. So,
I would always be the point person
working with your town.
So, I have many slides on your past
elections
>> and they're just looking at the data in
different ways so that we can glean some
information about how elections have
gone in the past. This is just meant to
be a big picture historical. Um, your
general overall passage rate for items
in the town are at about 78%.
uh in the general elections. So those
are your November elections in even
numbered years that passage rate uh is
at 100%. Primary elections 75%.
You can see five of your um elections
were in November, two in June, two in
March. They've most frequently been on
the November elections.
That's why we see such a higher
percentage of passage rate. Um,
overall, the other thing to consider in
each of these different types of
elections is your turnout. So, you'll
notice the first line down, we start
talking about turnout in those primary
elections. So, those are typically March
or June elections. Turnout is lower. And
this is a trend we see all across
California. Uh, voters turn out in lower
numbers in primary elections. In your
general election turnout, uh we see it
around 76%. Again, that's an average. Um
your next two bars down, we're just
talking about passage rate. So again,
kind of looking at general picture over
all the times. Uh in the 2022 primary,
there was a high passage rate of 87%.
Uh the lowest percent of a yes vote was
at 60% in the 2020 primary. That of
course was the beginning of uh the COVID
pandemic. Lots of ballot measures
struggled in that election. We saw um
you know people just very uncertain
about the future. So it's not surprising
that that would be the lowest yes
percent turnout.
>> Excuse me. Was that one of our ballot
measures that had a 60% yes?
>> Yes. Correct.
>> Which one was that?
>> I'll be going through these next. Yes.
So, um, and again, just thinking about
that being the beginning of COVID, it's
not surprising to see a lower yes
percent.
So, here are all of those elections as I
promised. Uh, it was, uh, probably, you
can see that one was measure F. It was a
student enrollment increase. It did
actually pass. It wasn't requiring a
twothirds vote. Um, but it was the
lowest yes percentage. Again, not
surprising for a ballot measure on the
ballot in March of 2020.
Um, as we look down this list, uh, you
can see many of them are the public
safety parcel tax, uh, the paramedic
services tax. Um, all of those renewals
and, um, except for, uh, the 2012, it
was to lower the tax. Um, and you can
see here again as we're looking at this
those November elections, the turnout
percent, then you see the yes percent.
Um, and then whether or not it passed.
So, the only time there was uh the no
vote that was in June 5th of 2012.
Um, and that one failed to pass. But
each time otherwise they have passed.
How far back in time did you go?
>> Uh, so we went back to 2010. Um, because
we we did have a major fail for Ross
School in what's that Elizabeth? 20
thou 2006. No, 2005. It was before the
flood.
>> Ah, yes.
>> May um excuse me Joy. These are just the
um town measures, right? It's not the
school district,
>> correct? There is there is actually
another uh there are some other
elections in here that are the school
district's parcel tax and we didn't
include all of those.
>> I think the school enrollment is
Branson, right?
>> Yep, it is.
>> Yeah, but the the 2060%
that wasn't a town measure. That was a
private school measure. So,
>> but it's considered the town's
>> right. No, of course. But I mean, as far
as like did the town put something
forward that didn't pass? Um it wasn't
the town that put that forward,
>> right? So the 2012 is the only measure
that we have that um so again we're kind
of looking at those turnout trends and
the yes percent. Um you know the
takeaway here is I I think one of the
takeaways anyway is that the town values
both public safety and paramedic
services and we can see that that is uh
true because it often is renewed except
for that uh 2012 measure. So, as we look
at each one of these just a little bit,
you know, in different ways, we're
looking at the yes vote, we're looking
at the no vote, and again, what type of
measure it was. Um, you know, you can
kind of see the data here. I'll just
kind of lightly gloss over these because
it's just each way of looking at that
summary chart that we just did, but it's
just a another opportunity to see all
the numbers because now you can see the
total number of voters plus the total
turnout each time. Um, so right when
we're looking at 2010, we can see 1677
total voters, the turnout was 1133, 68%
turnout. If we look then at the primary
measure on March 5th, 2024, you can see
total voters 1743.
Uh turnout was 874,
a 50% turnout. So just kind of comparing
here a November election to a March
election. Um so even though one is a
paramedic and the other is public
safety, we're still just looking at two
different election dates to see how the
turnout changes.
And on the next slide, we're looking at
a November election versus a June
election. So again, just taking a look
at the turnout. Um, you know, you can
see your yes vote, your no votes are,
you know, fairly similar. The June saw a
slightly higher yes vote. But, uh, as we
look down at the turnout, we can see
total number of voters voting in the
election, pretty similar at about 1,600
voters. Um but the November election a
slightly higher turnout as it reached
over a thousand voters turning out at
65% again June 892 53%.
And then finally here just another you
know public safety public safety both of
these are no uh November elections. Um
the 2016 election was a presidential.
The 2012 election um also a
presidential. And again, you can see
this is where you enjoy your highest
turnouts. So each time we're just kind
of looking how do these elections
compare to each other and how does
turnout compare? Because when we're
thinking about putting a potential
measure on the ballot, one of the things
that you want to understand is um is it
doing better when it's on a ballot with
lots of other things as these November
ballots are, right? Every time we have a
presidential year, just um even a
gubanatorial year like this year, we see
win many more things on the ballot. Many
state measures, many county measures,
many school measures, but we still enjoy
a large turnout. So although we may not
control the conversation, voters are
turning out to vote on the measures and
we're seeing that it's not impacting at
least these public safety measures. Um
you're still able to have a conversation
and be heard and these measures are
doing well in those November elections.
But if I go back one slide, you can see
again like the primary measures were
just seeing lower turnout. So, you might
be not there might not be as many things
on the ballot in that primary election,
but voters just aren't being compelled
to turn out even though it's still a
issue that is important to the town. So,
okay. So, uh h here we go. Just turnout
over time. Again, just another way to
look at it all and be able to kind of
see that turnout trend. So, we've put
the measures in there from 2010 to 2024.
You can see your high measure turnout
was measure K in 2016. That's when the
highest number of voters turned out.
These later election years, we just
haven't seen the same turnout. So,
again, those are primary elections,
those last three that we're seeing, the
F, the I, and the E. And you can see how
much lower the turnout is in those
primary elections.
So then we take a look at also the
passage rate for each of those elections
and you can see it's actually pretty
consistent. Um you know we have a a
little bit of a low drop there in that
June 5th of 2012. We have a little bit
of a a low drop in March of 2020. Both
of those you know that's the pandemic.
So you would expect that. Um but
otherwise you've enjoyed a pretty
consistent yes vote except for those
dips.
And so finally one last way to look at
it. Uh many people see different data
differently. So I'm trying to provide an
overall view so that you can you know
just see different ways of looking at
this. So again the yellow dots are the
primary elections. The blue dots are the
general elections. Those being the
November elections. And again, except
for those two elections where we saw a
dip in both voter turnout, uh we're also
seeing, you know, those measures kind of
down there in the lower end of
percentage passage or percentage yes,
not passage because again, the one
measure did pass the student enrollment.
It's just that it didn't require
twothirds.
So, one of the takeaways that again I
have about this is that when we're
looking at these elections, one
consideration you have when you're
looking at all of the um data
aggregately is, you know, mostly these
public safety measures, both of them,
the paramedic services and the public
safety one have enjoyed success
regardless of voter turnout. So it
didn't matter whether we had high voter
turnout or low voter turnout. It's just
a service that people care about and so
we were able to have a good conversation
and people understood the need of it. I
think as you're switching gears and
looking at a different subject, there
are a lot of things to think about. And
so the rest of the slides, I just kind
of want to go through that and pull that
apart because we're no longer talking
about public safety. We're talking about
public buildings and people have
different emotional attachments to each
of those items and it's worthwhile to
consider that as you're looking at what
you know what to do next and what type
of measure to put on the ballot. So when
you're looking at election timing and
you're considering that as part of the
process, the factors beside a primary
election or a general election are the
measure type, which is what I just
explained. Um, public trust. That's
always important when a a public entity
is looking to put a ballot measure on
the ballot. We see the more trust people
have in that public entity, the more
likely they are to be successful. Um,
tax amount. It's no surprise that here
in California, we're seeing a lot of tax
sensitivity recently, regardless of what
type of measure it is. Uh we've been
doing surveys all over the state and I
will say it is the number one issue I
have seen this past year that has come
up in the minds of California voters is
this tax sensitivity. Um a lot of that
is because of the economy. Uh people are
feeling inflation in a way that they
just haven't felt it before. Um and I
work in a lot of communities that are
similar small um and uh you know similar
demographics as the town of Ross. And it
doesn't matter where you are in
California, everyone is sort of feeling
this uh when you're thinking about it.
Also, another thing to consider is will
there be potential opposition? Do we
have everybody around the table? Is
everybody having a good conversation or
will there be opposition? Uh for a
potential geo bond on the b uh on the
ballot, it would be a twothirds measure.
Um so right in order to be successful
those measures require a lot of
consensus. Um they often fail when they
have a minimal amount of opposition
and then the ability to form and have an
independent campaign committee. Uh the
town can always provide public
information and talk about the process
uh just as you're planning to be doing
as you're moving forward. However, once
uh the town makes a decision to move
forward to put something on the ballot,
that has to be supported by an
independent campaign committee. And uh I
believe all of your previous measures
have had some level of that uh before,
which is part of the reason they were
successful.
So, what potential election dates are
available in 2027? There are four
potential election dates. 2027 will be
an off-year election. So just that alone
will likely make it a lower turnout
election because people are used to
voting in even numbered years and
they're used to voting in November of
those even numbered years.
There are pros and cons to each one of
these elections. We'll go through those
one by one. Um, but just on a high
level, uh, March 2nd, May 4th, the
county lists August 31st. That's very
odd to me, but their dates and their
calendar all line up with that August
31st. Uh, typically, uh, elections are
the first Tuesday after the first
Monday. So, we would confirm that with
the county, but it does appear that they
have an August 31st votebymail special
election. And then of course there is
the November 2nd 2027 special election.
So for each one of these elections there
are some pros and cons. Um one of the
big ones is the cost consideration.
You'll notice that some of these are
labeled vote by mail special election
and some are just labeled special
election. Um with the um with the
requirement now of vote centers, uh that
can often increase the costs for an
election, a standalone election
especially because you're required to
have a vote center open 10 days before
election day and that has to be staffed
by someone from the county during the
open hours and that can increase costs.
I recently did a ballot measure and I
just give this as an example for the uh
San Marino Unified School District. So
very small insular community, a little
bigger than the town of Ross, but also
small. Uh they were renewing a parcel
tax on the ballot. Uh because they were
required to have vote centers open. Uh
the uh county build them. Normally they
had paid somewhere around 20 to $30,000
to renew their measure. They were
charged over $800,000 for that election
and it took many many uh back and forth
for them for the county to come down
from that. So it's just I think really
important in the planning um to
understand what the county would charge
for a vote by mail versus a special
election. Uh I am very cautious about
that since since the district had been
built that the other things to consider
is just this November uh this November
because these are all 2027 uh election
dates. You're coming on the heels of
this November's election. Everyone will
have heard everything about this
November by the time you vote to move to
place something on the ballot in 2027
should you decide to do that.
This ballot will be crowded. There is a
contested gubanatorial election for the
first time in a long time in California.
Means we're going to have a lot of TV
ads, a lot of text messaging, a lot of
mail. There's also um some very uh
interesting statewide propositions that
include uh provisions about uh tax
measures that will get a lot of
attention this November as well. And uh
you know, as I mentioned on a previous
slide, the tax sensitivity is high. So
that will be interesting as that
conversation happens this November. Um
it's hard to get voters attention for
education when they're focused on
November. So they're focused on this
November's election. It's hard to get
them to think about the future when this
is what they're hearing all the time. Um
and then that voter, you know, tax
fatigue. Um and then lastly, you know,
Proposition 43, which is what I just
mentioned, uh that is on the ballot
talking about restricting, um the
potential for citizens initiatives and
uh tax measures going forward. So,
that's going to have a lot of
conversation around it and it'll just be
interesting as we move it forward based
on how California voters decide on that.
So, I think it's something to watch as
you're considering future ballot
measures.
So, I just again I promised that I would
go through each one of those as a pros
and con, but here I'm taking a moment to
just show what March would look like
because I think in order to understand
the pros and cons of each of these
elections, it's helpful to be thinking
of the uh process and kind of the
timeline that you'd be working under in
order to meet a particular deadline.
So, I like this graphic because
oftentimes when I'm thinking about a
ballot measure, I think about the
election date I'm targeting. So, in this
particular example, we are looking at
the March 2027 election. So, from there,
you have to work backwards and think,
okay, this is our ultimate target. What
does it look like when we work backwards
from that date? The important thing here
when you're looking at this is we have
purposely uh you'll notice there are
four steps but purposely we have colored
the first three arrows blue. Those are
items that a public entity can do as
part of their planning process. So
they're blue on purpose before that blue
line. Uh then the arrow changes uh color
to yellow because that is a separate
process done by the independent campaign
committee. So these first three arrows
are the things that the town can do as
part of your planning process.
So again, as we're kind of working
backwards, that date right under that
November 2026,
in order to place a measure on the
ballot, uh the council uh would have to
vote 88 days before election day at your
current elect uh cycle of meetings. That
likely means a November vote. So, voting
right after the general election in
order to meet that deadline to get on
the ballot for March. Uh it would enable
you to place that ballot measure on the
March ballot. So, everything we would be
doing between now um this middle of
August through that November date is
covered by those three arrows. So the
first thing you know kind of considering
is uh the voters whether or not you
would be interested in some sort of
voter survey to understand the interests
of your voters. Um the election timing,
what date is best suited? Uh the
political landscape and the tax rate.
Those are all part of the feasibility
question. Is this feasible to put on a
future ballot?
then you're kind of looking at that
September through November time frame uh
to do that awareness building. Those are
those non-advocacy communications. It's
part of the process that you're already
building. Um you know, having regular
meetings about the master plan
amendments, um talking about how you
would fund that, talking about potential
solutions. Um all of that awareness
building can be done using your existing
communications. Um, it's making sure
that everybody internally understands
the process and then also expanding that
to your external audiences. Again,
building on the transparency and trust
as you're moving through this process
and determining whether or not the
community is ready to move forward
because ultimately elections do cost
money. And if you're putting something
on the ballot, you want to hope that it
has a chance of success. Then the final
thing just before you vote is that
ballot measure development. So it is
that ballot question that important
75word statement that appears on the
everyone's ballots that they ultimately
vote on. Uh the tax rate which will be
part of the ballot book and then you
know also ballot arguments and signers.
So it's a it's a fairly compressed but
not impossible timeline in order to
prepare for a March election. And so you
can imagine as we go through each of the
other election dates, you're still doing
these same things. It's just changing
the time that we have in order to do it.
So here are some considerations for each
of those potential election dates. So
again, I have that March date, the May
date, the August date, and the November
date.
um each one of these it's very likely
that it will be a single issue ballot.
Uh right, there's just not much
likelihood that anything else would be
on the ballot. So again, we're probably
dealing with lower turnout. Um but some
advantages of each uh these elections,
obviously the March and May elections,
uh earlier funding for the potential
project, if it were to pass, uh it would
allow you to do that. Um, some
disadvantages for both of those is that
compressed, you know, faster time
schedule that we just saw on the
previous slide. Um, you know, potential
costs of a vote center in March because
you might remember that one just said
special election. It didn't say mail
ballot was available. Um, and less
project maturity, less time to, you
know, have the conversation with the
community, less time to make planning.
Um, same with May. Uh again, May is not
a time when people uh typically vote. So
you may see even lower voter turnout in
May because people just aren't expecting
and as school years are and graduations
and all those things are happening. Uh
we just don't see a lot of people um
participating in May elections. So it's
just important to kind of think about
that. Um August again single issue uh
earlier funding. Um the hard thing about
August elections I we have tried these
many many times in different
communities. I have rarely seen an
August measure pass. I'll be quite frank
because people are doing their last
minute traveling before their kids go
back to school or you know before the
end of the summer. it would be in my
mind the the one that I would least
likely recommend. Um it is just very
hard to capture voters in August uh
November of 2027. Um you know obviously
it is a longer runway. Um we won't know
again if there would be additional costs
if that would be required for a vote
center. That would be something we'd
have to figure out with the county. Um
but you'd have time for more public
outreach. you'd have more time for pro
uh project definition. Um it's possible
that if anyone else was targeting a
election, they'd probably be targeting
that. There could be other things on
that ballot, but again, I would expect
it would still be a single issue. Uh
very likely, it's just if if someone
else was looking at a ballot, they
probably would look at that.
So, the other thing I wanted to talk
about, and I know that uh the town has
perhaps uh not done a voter survey in
the past, but I wanted to sort of talk a
little bit about advantages and
disadvantages. Um I have worked with uh
towns that are even smaller than the
town of Ross who have done voter
surveys, so I know they can be done.
I've done jurisdictions that are even
smaller. um you know some that have had
50 to 150 voters. Uh you do voter
surveys differently in those
communities. Um so is it helpful? Yes.
But there are some considerations. Uh I
think uh what are some of those
advantages? A voter survey is a
scientific way to look at registered
voters who are likely to vote in a
particular election. So, it really is
meant to give you a clear idea of where
people are today on the issues and it
doesn't even just have to be about
uh the you know master plan project. You
could actually ask questions about other
things that are important in the
community. So, there are opportunities
to ask about other town priorities. So,
it could help you inform the process and
understand what some of the cost
tolerances are. Um, one town I worked
with, uh, they looked at two different
types of ballot measures. Uh, this was
way up north in, um, one of the northern
counties, uh, a sea or an oceanside
town. Um, and right, they were
considering both a fire measure and
another, uh, general sales tax measure.
Um, in order, you know, by going through
the survey process, they were able to
figure out what was best for their town.
and it actually helped them uh be
successful after uh previous failures.
So again, sometimes it can help give you
some information that you may not have.
The disadvantages are, you know, a
professional survey firm that is not me.
Uh we don't do surveys, but I work with
survey firms. Um depending on the type
of survey, you know, the cost can be
between 25 and 30,000. I think if you
are asking other questions about other
town priorities, it probably helps
add value. Uh if it's a single issue
survey though, it may not be as
valuable. That could be a disadvantage.
The other disadvantage is that it would
require some time to build that survey,
right? You'd want to hire a firm. You'd
want to talk to them about the
questions. You want um you know, in our
firm, I would work with you on that
process. uh if we were you know moving
forward um but it would add some time
right if we were targeting something in
March uh you obviously wouldn't want to
field a survey in October of this year
for example right it would mean you'd
have to do a survey in September and
then I'd have some questions about you
know how
since it was done before the election in
November like you know voter perceptions
could change so you wouldn't actually
want to do a survey day before the
November election and that's an
incredibly tight timeline between then
and March. So, you know, just concept.
Again, I'm not trying to tell you which
one is better. I'm just trying to
provide you with information to help you
make a good decision as you're
considering all these options.
So, uh next steps, I promise I think I'm
down to two slides. So, uh, next steps,
part of the next steps would be to bring
the team together to help, uh, put
together this plan. Uh, and that would
be including, you know, your bond
council, uh, the municipal financial
advisor. Uh, we would be part of that
communications and planning consultant,
um, your architect, your cost estimator,
and then, of course, town staff. That
really is your full team as you're
considering this project. Um the types
of things that we specifically work on
uh we work with the team on feasibility.
So is a survey right? What type of
survey is right? How should we go about
that? Um strategic communications. Uh in
many cities I've worked on you know town
halls or worked on presentations as you
go out. Sometimes instead of bringing
people to you it's better to go where
people are. So how do we work those uh
communications into those existing
meetings? um you know working on that
communication engagement uh election
timing and then coordination with all
the other adviserss oftentimes uh we
work to help um run the timeline and
just make sure because we do have a date
that we have in mind as I showed with
the timeline uh and we want to make sure
that we've accomplished all the things
we want to accomplish before the council
makes a decision about which direction
to go and and ultimately placing a
measure on the ballot.
So here it is. I promised the last
slide. Uh so happy to answer any
questions. But I think some of the
things that we were hoping this would uh
lead to discussion on is you know is the
town interested in continuing evaluing
future uh future funding options? Um do
we feel that uh public outreach is
appropriate? um is there any other
analysis on the election timing and you
know whether we should uh our firm
should be a part of that process. So
these are our questions and I don't know
David if you had anything else or
>> just add a quick uh as as Joy mentions
one of the partners
that the town would engage with respect
to a bond measure would be your
financial or municipal advisor and we
are working with Philman Rolap on a on a
scope of work. Uh should council decide
to move forward, we will um be working
with them to uh help assist with
determining appropriate tax rates that
would fund the proposed uh geo bond
measure.
» Questions?
>> Will there be questions and then public
comment and then we will discuss that.
Okay. So um one question, what is the
date of the May election?
>> Uh yes. So I believe it was May 4th.
Yes. I'm happy to go back to
>> So that actually wouldn't I mean it
might not affect you mentioned college
and things like that, but people vote a
month ahead. So I mean it may not it may
not be as late as it sounded if it's May
4.
>> Yes, this is true. It's just a not a
normal time that people would vote. So
you're dealing with an election that
almost no one votes in. And then um what
uh you said there could be a cost for
voter uh centers in March. What do you
estimate the county would charge uh our
town if we have that in on on the ballot
for a voter center?
>> We don't I don't know at this time. Uh
again, the cost where I find the cost
exists is the fact that they have to
fund a paid position for all 10 days
that someone is there while the vote
center is open. So that's that's what
happened in our small community in San
Marino. They actually had to pay for the
cost of the vote center and that I mean
it was
>> But you said you said 10 days was
$800,000.
>> Remarkably, it was six. Well, they when
they gave us a breakdown, it was 600,000
for that piece of it. Yes. It it just
can be we just don't know. We would have
>> a way to get closer to that as we're
trying to decide. I mean, to me, that's
a deal breaker. Like, I I don't I can't
imagine.
>> And again, the county here may deal with
it differently. I don't want to I I just
was providing an illustrative example.
>> You know, we would communicate with the
county to determine what that might
actually look like to give you a better
idea. And I'm sorry, Chris.
>> That's okay. Um, thank you, Mayor Prom
Robbins, for the question. I I asked
this of our county election office. What
would be And they they usually provide
us a range and um, if I recall, the high
end of the range would would be about $25,000
total. But this is a good cautionary
tale that Joy provides that we would
want to make sure that the county is we
don't want a surprise like that. So, um,
>> 25 could would include the voter
station.
>> I I asked him, "Our council is looking
into doing a an item on a special
election in 2027. Can you give me a an
estimate of how much it would cost the
town of Ross to do this?" And he said,
he gave me a low end and he gave me a
high-end. um he didn't particularly say
voter um vote centers, but he said the
high end based on our registered voters
was about 25 thou. And so I said, "Wow,
so the worst case scenario is 25,000."
And he said he said yes.
>> Okay.
>> But I would very much like to and that
was I have an email to that effect, but
I would very much would would want to
confirm that now that we have this
cautionary tale. And I think a lot too
depends on what other jurisdictions
ha if somebody else you know we get to
split the cost if somebody else another
jurisdiction has a um a measure on the
ballot.
>> Wasn't there something some other town
or someone putting something on the
March ballot already?
>> Did you I thought I read something about
something go on the March ballot
but no one's heard. Okay.
>> No. And again, I my concern is that they
specifically designate special election
versus vote by mail special election on
the county website. So, it's just it's
just worth verifying because you
wouldn't want to be surprised.
>> Of course. Okay. Thank you.
>> Um could you just briefly talk a little
bit about ballot measure 43?
>> Uh Proposition 43.
>> Proposition. Um so this is um this is
the business roundts uh measure. Uh they
are um for years there has been uh much
discussion about the upland decision
which allowed uh citizens initiative
measures to go on the ballot and pass by
50% plus one. Um and many of the
taxpayer groups have felt uh thwarted by
this and so they have been trying to
unwind it many different ways over
several election cycles. Uh and in this
last election cycle, they did uh collect
enough signatures to get their measure
on the ballot, which essentially would
undo the ability to uh do this citizens
initiative and get something on the
ballot and get it passed by 50% plus
one. Uh it would then require that 2/3.
Yes. Um and when you read it, it reads
very much like you know
um protecting taxpayers and uh so there
is uh there have been a lot of polling
about it. Uh the governor's office at
one point tried to negotiate to get it
off the ballot. That did not work. It
will be on the ballot and there will be
a lot of discussion about taxes this
November or October.
>> Yeah. Thank you.
>> So, I had a question about the
surveying. Does the the survey exercise
inform how the ballot measure would be
structured?
>> It does. Yes. So, you put the uh you
actually would test the 75word language.
Uh you can also test uh different tax
rates to help understand whether there
is sensitivity to a particular dollar
amount. Um you can you can ask about
different town priorities uh right um
you know lighting streets other things
that are important. It doesn't have to
be this single issue. Um but you
ultimately are trying to understand how
voters feel about the particular issue.
>> And how broad of a survey would it be if
we have 1600 voters like 200 people?
>> Uh it probably would be 200. Yes. And
that affects the margin of error. A
standard survey um for most
jurisdictions like no matter how big is
400. That gives you a 5% margin of
error. It's like 4.7 uh with a 95%
confidence level. At 200, it tends to be
like an 8% margin of error. At a 95%
confidence level, but um we do that
quite a bit actually. Um it I I often
have surveys that come back with 200 uh
or so sample size and it's still
very valid. Um I I still get very strong
results that help with the planning of a
particular measure. Could you go back to
your slide where you had the the three
blue arrows and then the the yellow
arrow mark? I'm just wondering, Christa,
if you could give some feedback about
all the stuff that would need to happen
between now under those blue arrows um
leading up to when we would decide on
putting something on the ballot,
» uh the the phrase that pops out at me
and immediately is tax rate. So under
item number one
um you know we have to have a project to
have the most accurate cost estimate and
um right now we're going through an
amendment process to do that. So and
there's um some elements there of the
CAC plan that are you know we need it's
we need to know what the project is
going to be to describe the process. So
um that's an important part of number
one. Um and then it looks like we can
refine it in step number three. So it
can be refined but um that's my question
is how can we start with feasibility
without knowing
what the project is?
Um maybe uh Joy has some other comments
of your experience with other uh
communities.
Yeah, I I mean obviously as you're going
through it
when I think about your previous
measures that have enjoyed a lot of
success again I think they are centered
on priorities that are important to
Californians, right? Public safety,
paramedic services, uh many other
jurisdictions anchor their public
finance measures on those things, right?
Um, and
public entity bond measures are
different because they're focused on
buildings, not services.
And it's just a different emotional
conversation.
Uh, and so it requires a lot of
community engagement. It requires it's
it and again not that these things never
pass. Many buil you know, libraries have
been built. uh many things have been
done through these measures but it is
because a community had a transparent
open process where there was a lot of
conversation and there was time to plan.
So I think that is critical. Um and not
saying that you haven't already done
that but that would be my word of
caution as you're moving forward is just
think about
because it's always hard to recover from
a loss. It's not impossible, but you
know, it is hard to recover from a loss
and then come back and be right back on
a ballot again.
>> But aren't aren't we mischaracterizing
this election? You're saying it's public
buildings, but it has a very strong
public safety component. The Gensler
plan included the option for a fire
station and I think that it's that
option that that will generate support
widespread support and it is seen as a
public by many people it is seen as a
public safety election and that should
be benefit us. I would think
>> it can um again I've seen ballot
measures sometimes people identifi and
again I I recognize that there is a
great interest in a fire station here in
the town um and that alone could
generate interest so I'm not uh
disregarding that but buildings are
still buildings and services are still
services and I just you know see it time
and time again
the more time you have for an open and
transparent discussion with the
community about it, the better your
project is and the better the project
is, the more willing people are because
ultimately you're asking them to reach
into their pockets and help pay for it.
And so, right, they're just it's just
part of the process to get their
engagement and buy in.
So in in our town we have a contested
council election in November and very
much this project is the core of the
contested election. What you know your
timeline is that in November right after
that election we're supposed to be
filing for this bond measure.
Any thoughts about that?
Well, it's a very compressed and tight
timeline, and I think you'd be trying to
put for a March election, you'd be
trying to put something on the ballot
after, again, I worry a bit about voter
fatigue. I worry a bit about u the
uncertainty. You don't know what the
makeup of your council will be like. Um,
those are all questions that
in my mind you would be better served
getting past this November election.
Ultimately, again, you know, your town.
I, you know, I'm trying to bring ways to
think about this, but it seems like a
very difficult time to put something on
the ballot after this November election.
>> Okay. You know, I agree completely. I I
mean I don't know if you know that we
have saved like $20 million, you know,
so it's not that we need the funds
immediately. There's not an immediate
rush for the funding.
>> It's 13.7.
>> Okay. But we have in reserves. The town
is sitting on $20 million.
>> Well, no, 13.7 is reserved for the
facility project. Um,
also I think to get the new people, the people who win the council election,
to get them seated at the council, I
think it requires at least 30 days to
verify the voter count. So, they
probably wouldn't even be seated until
after the time that we would need to
approve,
>> right?
30 days from election day that the
>> But why would that why would that
matter? because this council unanimously
approved moving forward with the
building and every candidate that I'm
aware of who's running is absolutely
committed to getting this building
built. So I feel like if there's a
transition on the council, the goal of
the building should just move forward.
So I don't I don't see that November is
a makeorb breakak date. Um I mean if
there are issues needing more definition
of the project then my question would be
well can we ask Gendler to speed up some
of their designs so we so we have the
def as much project you know as much
information as we need. Um but but I
don't I I don't see November as as a
make or break time because I feel like
there's there's widespread interest in
this. this council has approved it and
everyone who's running wants to do it.
So I don't I don't think I understand
why November matters.
You know if to me it sounds seems like
it only matters because we need a better
well- definfined project. But why not
ask Enler to move you know move forward?
Don't we need the money fast? I mean I I
thought we needed the money sooner
rather than later.
>> I mean there's economies of scale of
doing everything all at once but as Matt
points out we have all this money. So
there could be a potential to phase
things and slow things down if if we if
we want to do that. Um,
and I also think, you know, it it
depends the lens is going to be
different depending upon who is sitting
here and they're going to have, you
know, different group edits on the
ballot language and there's going to be
I agree that every candidate supports
the building, but I think there each
person sitting here will bring different
perspectives to what we're doing. So, I don't know about the timing. It's I
think it's challenging,
>> but if we could have group edits.
>> I don't Are we still in questions?
>> We're in questions. Point of
>> order. Thank you.
>> Um
Christa,
>> may I ask a question of the consultant?
Um Joy, you've commented that the
November uh date is usually a better
turnout. Is there do you differentiate
between November of an off year and
November of a
>> an even year
>> of an even year?
>> Exactly. So the your your best voter
turnout will always be in an even year.
Um always uh it's just when people are
used to voting. It doesn't mean that and
again
if I just you know scatter back here
you know and we just look at turnout
right so you can you can see these
turnouts in different elections and you
can see you know in March and June the
turnout is so much lower even in an even
numbered year and you'll notice that you
don't have an odd year election
because we just are not trained to vote
in off years. So, it's hard for me to
believe that you would It's not
impossible. Again, sometimes we exceed
voter expectations through a tremendous
advocacy campaign. I'm talking, you
know, knocking on doors, getting out,
but you know, even your primary
elections here are barely getting over
50%.
and that's in an even numbered year. So,
I understand the need to want to be on
the ballot sooner because it would help
bring project funds earlier, but I do
think your turnout
in an odd year is always going to be a
challenge. So, no matter which date you
choose, turnout will be a piece of that.
>> But why would we worry about turnout?
When we look at this, it looks like
regardless of the time, regardless of
the turnout, we have very generous
passing margins. So why are why
shouldn't we just be looking at what
percentage approves of the ballot
measure and if we have not a very low
big turnout but we have a very generous
passing margin isn't that all that
matters why why do we care about turnout
I I'm not sure that I agree with that
we're supposed to be focusing on turnout
because it seems like you know is isn't
that correct that even with low turnouts
uh and forget the 20 you know 2012 and
2020 with low turnouts uh the ballot
measures passed handily Isn't that what
that shows?
>> Um, to me it shows that people care
deeply about public safety and paramedic
services. So, I I think the correlation
is tougher between uh the yes vote and
the turnout. So, I I don't disagree that
you might have low turnout in a March
election and be successful, but we just
don't have data that shows that right
now. We have data that shows that voters
turn out lower in in the ele that are
not November. And we also see that
voters greatly value public safety and
paramedic services.
>> And and those um elections are for like
a$1,000
parcel tax for public safety or they're
for a renewal of our paramedic
um tax, which is like 90 to $100. So
this is going to be a really different
magnitude of impact for the residents.
And I'm wondering if you have any data
where other similarly situated
jurisdictions put something on a ballot
on an odd year for a general obligation
bond and
similarly situated and what was their
experience and maybe we can glean
something from that.
>> I'm happy to look back. It's a very rare
case that we see that and I I will do
some more research to see if I see that.
Um it's it's because oftent times when
people are doing their toughest measures
they looked for better voter turnout. Uh
when you're turnout is lower
um you know you don't enjoy some of the
benefits of a higher turnout election.
So, we we have been um criticized in the
past for putting a measure on a special
ballot um by a taxpayer group and we had
to resend
um the uh parcel tax renewal and move it
to a regular election. And they're um on their website they say
they oppose any special election period.
>> Yeah. So that's something that we need
to be aware of. Any other Christa?
» Um I think Joy, is it correct that um
parcel taxes and sales tax measures need
to be in the general election?
>> Uh so uh yes, general sales tax measures
have to be uh on the ballot when council
members are on the ballot. They
>> but not parcel taxes.
>> Um parcel taxes. So geo bond measures
are very particular. Those can go on an
odd year election. Um I believe parcel
taxes are also required to be on a
regularly scheduled election. Mhm. Um,
>> so that that could explain some of the
history here that these are all partial
taxes, not and and um and I was also
curious about that issue of of um well,
the fact that the town hasn't had the
experience of the bond of a of a geo
bond. Yeah, I think it's it is an
interesting question because you're
talking about a P parcel tax which is a
flat rate tax versus a geo bond which is
of course a rate assessed on a 100,000
uh per or excuse me it's a flat rate b
or it's it's a dollar amount based on
per 100,000 of assessed valuation. So,
for example, $25 per 100 of assessed
valuation. And if a home is assessed at
a million dollars, then right, they're
paying 10 times the $25. So, it does
have an a different emotional appeal uh
feel to people. Again, a project can
also be very emotional. To the mayor
prom's point, um many people care about
this. It is an issue that people are
passionate about. I don't deny that. I'm
just saying people also feel very
passionately about taxes right now, too.
>> Go ahead, Matt.
>> So, just to to distill it down, this has
been a really interesting discussion.
So, thank you and thank you, Christa,
for putting this on the agenda. Your
best advice for pretty much generic
advice is being on a November election
during an even year is the best chance
to get things done because the voter
turnout is the best. And then it just
goes down from there if if you don't if
you can't be on an even year November.
>> I mean actually I would say my advice is
uh give yourself time to do a
feasibility study to have an open and
transparent process with your voters. I
think that is your best chance of
success. I think it's possible to pass a
measure in an odd election year. It's
not impossible to do that. But voters
will
struggle to support a measure that they
feel is not well thought out. And
>> yeah, I'm just asking about timing.
That's it.
>> Your your biggest voter participation
will be in November of 2028.
It doesn't mean that single issues
ballot measures.
>> That's all my question is. Thank you.
» Hey, Bill, do you have any questions?
Hearing
none, we will
>> Sorry, I'm I had my audio off so I
wouldn't disturb anyone.
>> No, I don't. I I I appreciate all the
questions I would have asked have been
asked by the council members. So, thank
you.
>> Okay. Public comment, Mr. Kuwan.
>> Thank you, Joy. My name is Jeff Keon.
I'm the town treasurer.
So, I'm the guy who owns this problem.
Nice to meet you.
>> You too. Thank you for coming.
>> Basically, all the data you've related
and dealt with has been a partial tax.
And of course, that's not how general
obligation bonds work.
Um, nor do we have the ability or the opportunity to delay this past 2027.
>> It's going to happen in 2027.
>> Yes. So, um, as you pointed out just a
few minutes ago, the tax is based on the
assessed value of the homes. There are
some extremely valuable homes here in
Ross. So, the spread between high and
low is a huge difference. High and low
tax. That's what I meant. So, with all,
pardon me, with all of that in mind,
does any of that change? How would you
would your presentation have been
different if you knew that this is the
only option we have a general obligation
bond?
>> Uh so so I presented the data knowing
that and presented the data knowing that
the 2027 elections were the options that
you were exploring. So, um, yes, and my
I guess if I were to fall on an ultimate
recommendation, I would say planning for
enough time for community engagement is
what's going to increase your chances of
success and help you define the project.
>> Yeah, no question about it. But we're
probably going to be the only issue on a
ballot
>> in in 2027. Yes, that's right. I agree.
>> That's the point. Thank you. Anybody
questions from you folks about what I
just said?
>> Nope. Okay. Thanks, Julian.
>> Yeah. Let's see if there's any other
public comment first. Anybody online,
Zach?
>> No one online. Mayor.
>> Okay. Go ahead, Terry.
So, Joy,
in your opinion,
is March too soon?
In your opinion, given that we need to
plan for community engagement, is March
too soon for a success?
If we didn't have this November and and
the propositions on the ballot, I would
say maybe there was a an opportunity to
have good community engagement. But I am
concerned about the tone and tenor of
this November's election and the ability
to have a quality conversation with
voters uh in that time period
considering when you would have to vote
to place this on the ballot. So it does
feel compressed to me. I never say
anything's impossible. Yeah.
>> But it does feel compressed to me.
>> May a better option.
Uh, I think it gives you more time
because if you're thinking about when
you would have to vote to put that on
the ballot, it actually is uh Oh, I had
it in the presentation, but it it
actually is after that November
election. It does give you a little bit
more time.
>> Okay.
>> So, I want to say it's in January,
but
» um any further discussion? Yes,
Elizabeth.
So, um, I think that it's really
important that this go on the ballot
soon because I think there's a lot of
momentum with the April 29 presentation,
the reception of the Gensler project,
hiring Gensler. Um,
you know, March versus May isn't that
different. I think later than May would
be would be could torpedo the whole
project. I think we could lose interest.
I think people could say, you know, why aren't you moving forward? We
thought you had all this in line. We
thought you had unanimous agreement. And
I think we could lose momentum and lose
votes if we don't if we don't act
quickly. I mean, March or May, I think
they're both fine. Um, you're right
about public engagement, though. We have
many meetings coming up right now and
the meetings are planning meetings about
the the um the building but they will
serve as engaging the public so that
when we do talk about what the tax will
be everyone will be will know already
what we're talking about. So I don't
think public engagement will be that
difficult. Um I do think you mentioned
public trust. Public trust is hugely
important. the um the 2012 uh um parcel
tax that failed. There were a lot of
town politics and a lot of people were
unhappy and they basically said no and
we need and then four years later when
we did another tax um things had changed
the the tone of the town had changed and
that passed handily. So we do want to be
sure that we're moving carefully and
that that we're including people and
that there's trust. Um
uh
let's see. Um I do you know there there
was a mention that well we have some
money so we could phase this. I think
that we will lose ground if we phase
this. I think that if we start building
uh I think we lose maybe we get a
paramedic station but we lose the rest
of the building. People are going to say
well why why vote for anything? We you
know we're partway there. I don't really
care. Whereas this is a package deal.
the whole the whole beautiful building
and it's gorgeous plus the possibility
of a fire station. I think that that
will generate a lot of votes and I think
if we split this up I don't quite know
who's going to vote for the you know the
lower tax later on. I I I don't I think
this it's better all at once. Um and I
don't think people want to drag out the
project. Um
see any other comments here? Um,
oh, uh, well, we'll have to talk about
this. Um,
uh, Julia mentioned like will it be a
problem with cost if we have it, you
know, at at a non-regular election. I
think given our building needs, giving
given the um the interest in getting the
paramedic facility done on time, I I
don't think we have a lot of choice. I I
don't think cost is going to say, "Oh,
no, you can't do it now because we have
timelines that that tell us that we have
to." So, I I don't think that that I
don't think that will be a problem. Um,
and then you mentioned surveys. So, here
I I really don't think that the town
should be doing surveys. I think that
especially I people are going to look at
the cost and say, "Why are we spending
$30,000 for a survey?" People are going
to look at it's kind of like the
slickness of it that, you know, we're
sort of polling people. And I think when
you have a big district, so the the high
school district that includes Mil
Valley, it includes um Sanelmo, Fairfax,
the whole area, all of all of um
southern Marin. I think that it's
reasonable for them to try to get a
sense of what do their voters think,
what will they approve. We've got not a
lot of voters. Everybody goes to the
post office almost every day. I think we
have a very good feel for what people
are saying, what they're thinking, what
they will vote for. And I think it would
harm us more than help us to do a survey
because I think it will be seen as, you
know, well, the town's hiring a
consultant and they're spending a lot of
money and should they really be spending
money on on yet another consultant
because we already have a lot of
consultants on this project and
certainly in the last I mean 30 years
that I know of there hasn't been a
political consultant doing a survey
there. We did one, you know, an in-house
one about the fire station, but there's
something about a political survey that
in my opinion doesn't feel right for
this town, and I don't think the cost
will be well received. So, those are my
thoughts.
>> Okay. Um, sort of piggybacking on you,
Elizabeth, I actually think trust is a
very important and a critical issue and
I think it's going to take time and I
think we need to put the time into
working with the community.
Um, I think phase in is possible. I
think we have a big commitment to make
sure that we rebuild the build the
paramedic facility. Got to do it. And if
it meant we phased in so we got that
piece done in time to meet our
obligation, I think that's not a bad
thing to do. So I wouldn't I wouldn't
rule out phasing in this project. Um it
may end up costing us a little more
money to do it, but I think if it was
way for us to also honor our obligation
to the paramedics, I think it's worth
it. So, um, and as for a survey,
I was sort of on the fence, but I think
the survey would give us a little more
information than we currently have now.
Um, and
uh, I I actually would be curious as to
the results of that survey about where
people are with the civic center and why
they want that civic center and why it
would be important to them. So, I I
think it's worth the money, but I worry
about the time. So, there we go.
» Well, I I would say the first thing is
that we act as if the civic center is
going to actually like we're going to
design this plan and they're going to
start shoveling. We have so much time
because we don't even have a plan yet
and I can't even imagine going to the
voters in March or May because we we you
know we we we're at the beginning stages
of this process and then there'll be an
environmental study and just seeing
what's going on with our um Bolina storm
drain where they discovered Indian
remains and it's slowing the project. So
there's just a lot of time. I think
we're excited which is great and we all
want to do this but but there is time
and we have thankfully saved 13 million
in the capital projects. We also have 7
million of extra reserves. We have a lot
of cash sitting on hand. So it's not
that we couldn't spend money on the
project and continue to move it forward.
We have the money. We're so fortunate to
have the money. The bond is really going
to the public to get their blessing that
this is the right course. We will know
that in November because we have an
election for a new council. I'm I the
survey is fine. I I I love hearing from
the people, but we will hear from them
in November. There'll be a campaign and
there's going to be four there's four
candidates for two positions. And so we
will actually hear what the candidates
say and what the people want. And I
think that's going to be telling for
what sort of project they really are
supporting. And so once that is done,
then I think and you have a new council
seated, then you can start building the trust and the outreach for why this
project matters and what you want to
build. So I don't think this needs to be
decided tonight. I don't I think the
presentation is very informative, but I
don't see any hurry to rush to try to
pass a bond measure. I think a bond
measure is going to fail because there's
been so much um information out in the
public on both sides and this issue has
been very contentious. It's almost
better to wait and hopefully let this
November pass and let the people speak
and let the town and the the sort of
opposition fade away because the
opposition is there. We just we don't
have a set project even to even think
about at this point or vote on or send
to our voters and certainly we won't
have the clarity we need in November.
>> Bill comments.
>> Well, I
you know I I I've listened carefully to
the presentation. I think it's a lot of
interesting information.
Uh and it's a lot to think about and a
lot to process.
But I will say overall
I think that um I'm beginning to think
getting something passed in March would
be very difficult to get to do all the
things we need to do and let the let
this project well I think the term was
mature a bit more. We're we're we're
moving ahead as quickly as we can but um
there's so much that would have to
happen in that time frame. The other
thing that really impressed me about the
presentation was
this the fact that there are a lot of
ballot measures on the November ballot
that do involve taxes and ancillary
considerations
and there may be a bit of public u well
I don't know a residue from that that
may complicate what we're trying to do.
On the other hand, uh this idea of just
mail-in only elections in May or August,
I I I'm not so sure about that one. Um
that would be um that would be low
turnout, particularly August.
So anyway, my thoughts again, I don't I I I would need some time to think
about this, but those are my
impressions.
>> Yeah. And my Julie, can I ask you a
question first? after after everyone
speaks, can we share comments about
comments,
let me just, you know, just offer a few
additional comments about what each of
us said because we're listening to each
other's comments and thinking about what we said.
>> As long as we don't have to have
comments.
>> Well, and I'm sorry, we don't need to
decide anything. This isn't this is a no
action item. I just want to make that
clear.
>> Yeah. And that was going to be my
question, Christa. When do we I mean
there's that chart with those three, you
know, blue arrows and then the yellow
arrow. That chart really kind of scared
me because there's so much that has to
happen between now and May, March. Um
so what what are we doing here tonight?
So this item is on the agenda just as a
presentation and an education, an
opportunity for you to ask questions
which you have. Um,
keeping in mind though that that chart
that you just described is, you know,
what I've heard from the council these
past months of regular meetings and
special meetings and late additions to
the meetings has been we got to do this
because it has to be on the March
agenda. March agenda, March agenda. I
mean, really, that's what the council
has been saying loud and clear over and over again. So when I look at
that that chart and it says, you know,
we if we want to be doing if if the
council wants to I didn't hear what
council member Kercher what his thoughts
are about um serving, but if the
consensus of the council is there's an
interest in serving, we need to be doing
that now. And it's I need to be bringing
back to the council a proposal to do
surveying. and having done it um with a
council subcommittee at a previous um in
a previous employment. it putting
together the survey can be very it took
many subcommittee meetings and um part
of it was because the council wanted to
utilize the survey instrument to ask
other questions like do people want to
have a no smoking ban so it could grow
right so it's it's doing a survey is a
project itself so doing the project
along with all the other things and then
remember we are on we already in week
one of a 12week uh amendment process
that I'm very concerned about our
ability to do all that and I would need
to be working with Joy and our team on a
survey like like now to bring it back to
the council on September 10th. So that
that's I I I'm interested in direction
on that particular topic but again I'm
not sure how much direction you can give
me tonight. Um I would have to look to
the turnon for that.
» Could I comment on the the survey? I
didn't, as town manager mentioned, I
didn't didn't say anything about that.
>> Um,
can you hear me?
>> Yeah. Go ahead, Bill.
>> It's okay. All right. You know, we did a
survey with regard to the closing of the
firehouse
and there's been so much controversy
about that survey. Was it complete
enough? Did we have a big big enough
sample? And that was something just the
town manager put together as I recall.
But we we we're still talk we were
talking about it till fairly recently.
So as Christa said, I mean this is
something that takes some time to do and
it would take a time some time to get
agreement if there was agreement on how
it was phrased because you do want the
answers to be meaningful
and and so I I think you know
particularly in a compressed time frame
I don't see the survey as being that
doable or that helpful. It might be a
distraction from other things. our focus
on making decisions as this goes along
about about the the what the the Gendler
firm is doing.
» Uh um yeah, I I agree with you, Bill. Um
I mean, I feel like all of this it's
helpful to have some information. What does March look like? What does May
look like? But I think I feel like we're
starting to stray away from, you know,
the the Gensler CAC plan that we heard
about in April. That was, you know, a
really good plan that we all wanted to
move forward on. And I get that this is
about uh the steps to move forward. But
I think we have to be careful we don't
make so many steps that we're losing the
momentum that we had on April 29. I I
have one question. Um I thought it
wasn't even possible to phase because
it's a, you know, a big building. So is
that can I ask Dan you know what how
would that work? Can this be phased and
still get the same building? I thought
that the earlier concept E was phasable
but I thought that this one wasn't. So I
that's a question. Can can Dan answer? I
um I would like to take a stab at that.
Okay. So the scope of work for our
consultant team Gendler includes um
evaluation of phasing.
So this is going to be this is that that
issue is going to be evaluated during
this plan amendment process.
>> Can I ask Dan's opinion?
>> But Dan is you well I'm saying Dan is
not part of the Gendler project team. So
I can tell you that the Gendler project
team has assured me and it's in their
scope of work. It was in the request for
proposals and it is in their contract to
perform that.
Okay. Um
then back to the just your comments
about November the election that
there'll be a you know we we need to see
where we're going. Again, I I maybe I'm
more optimistic, but I feel like there's
a great deal of support for this, for
moving forward with this, whatever the
steps are, and that there's not any
change in November, because there's not
a single candidate who doesn't agree
that we should move forward with this.
So, I I don't see that this is uh I
mean, there may be some issues about how um focused are you on building a
fire station, but that's not really the
building plan. The building plan is to
get this built. So I don't see that
November is a is a turning point. I
think the turning point was April with
the very beautiful Gendler CAC plan and
that we should stay on track with that
and not take too many steps to get it
going.
I I guess my I I think I would like to
have like a critical path schedule of
November November of 2027,
August, May, and March and all the stuff
that needs to happen to lead up to each
of those dates to see, you know, this is
a huge component of all of that, but
there's so many other lines like, you
know, the environment enironmental
stuff, the the description of the
project, um the cost estimate, the bond
council. I mean, it's just layers and
layers of complexity. Um, and so I think
it would help me. I don't know if it
would help other people, but I think it
would help to what Richard Hanam said a few weeks ago, take the end date. And
now, unfortunately, there's like four
end dates and move back and see, you
know, is is it feasible to get to a
March election date?
>> That chart scares me. Is it feasible to
get to a May 4th election date? You
know, hopefully it is. Um, I don't think
we want to be in a position where we're,
you know, spending money that we may not
have. I think that we need to have
certainty with having a a bond passed if
we're going to do the whole project. If
we're going to phase it, then we can dip
into that 13.9
or whatever it is. Um,
but it I think maybe start at the end
and kind of move back in terms of the
election and and then there's the
penultimate date of the, you know, the
January 1st, 2029 delivery of the
paramedic facility. I mean, that's the key. That's the most
important thing. Um, and I don't know if
we have capacity within if David could
help do that. Um, I think that would be
helpful. And then are we gonna bring
this matter back in a month or two to
continue discussing or how how do we
move forward from here?
>> Well, I I there's I what I'm hearing
this evening, there's not consensus of
the council to go forward with the
survey. So, that's good direction for
me, at least at this time. So, that's
good direction for me. Um, and we we've
I've engaged the services of Joyy's firm
to help us with this. And it's uh, you
know, it's a it's a monthly fee. So, we pay we use it where how much I could
call her every day.
>> She could come to meetings here every day if we needed it, right? Um, so
we need to just we need to be moving
forward. I mean, we have a deadline
today. Our first deadline with Gendler,
our contract started a week ago. Our
first deadline, staff deadline was
today. And so, um, we need to be moving
this forward to to meet that 12week. And
for me, it's the most important thing
are the council decisions that are going
to have to take place. That is what is
driving is going to drive this this
project. Are you going to be able to
make decisions to provide direction to
your staff team and your consultant
team?
much. So, as as for this, we we have an
agreement with um Joy and her firm, and
we will continue. We uh David and I have
a meeting scheduled, and we'll probably
be including Joy with our U municipal
financial advisor. Um I'd like to have
it would be good to have more feedback.
I I I hadn't heard from council member
that he was not as much of a um emphatic
about that march about doing a march
batlet. So, I think that alone was
really useful for me and our team to
hear um that maybe there's some little
more flexibility in that March date. So,
the good news is we have meetings with
the council every two weeks so we can
bring something back.
>> Yippee. That's good news for you.
>> Okay. Any Terry? I just wanted to say I
for me I don't want anything to derail
the staff over the next 12 weeks. The
next 12 weeks are really important.
We've got a contract. We've got work we
have to do. Uh Gendler is got work they
have to do. That should be our top
priority.
And fitting in the work with joy is
great,
but it can't derail those 12 weeks of
the work that has to be done.
I think the the most important thing is
that we can pass the bond measure,
right? So that in order to pass the bond
measure, we need a fully baked plan that
everyone is behind that the community
understands and supports and that we can
get the engagement with. We're nowhere
near that. We we it's impossible at this
moment even to contemplate that at this
moment at this juncture. So, I think we
just need to be realistic that trying to
push for something that doesn't exist is
not going to make it all of a sudden
exist. I think we are all excited about
the project and moving forward and it's
very the that there we're meeting every
week for 12 weeks. So, it's not that
we're not moving forward, but we the
idea of a political process is to get it
passed. We need to get 66%. How do we
get that? And I would that is what you
need to work on is we now have enough
information to sell the public that
we've the community we've all come
together and we have a great plan. We're
just not there yet.
>> And I'll just add and maybe I shouldn't
but I will. But I I think the public
trust component is huge and I think the
um there's aspects of the community that
are pretty divided right now. And I
think the um November 3rd election is
just going to divide the community even
more. So I think knowing that and having
something on the heels of a pretty
divisive town council election is
probably not great timing. And Elizabeth
and I worked on a school bond measure um
that failed um in I think it was 2004.
Um, and it just took a tiny tiny bit of
opponents to derail that. And it wasn't
many, and you know, we had drunk the
Kool-Aid, but we really thought it was
going to pass and it didn't. Um, we got
59%. Um, and it took a long time for the
community to heal and pivot and readress
those needs. Um, we had a silver lining
with a flood, so that helped. Um, but we
don't we we don't want to do this twice.
We have to do it well and successfully
one time.
So,
yeah. Excuse me, mayor. I'm sorry. I
didn't catch Did you Were you interested
in the survey now?
>> Oh, I didn't know pine about that. I
thought I was getting away with not
opining.
>> Well, I was looking at my notes here and
I I have two yeses and two nos. So I
>> um I think if the survey helps inform the
ballot language for the general
obligation bond um then I would be more
inclined to do that. Um but I think the
timing of the survey would be important.
I think there would need to be distance.
You know, I hadn't appreciated all these
other things that are going to be going
on the November ballot and the voter
fatigue and people are going to be sick
of dealing with elections for a while
and these issues. So, I think the timing
of the survey would be important.
>> Okay. So, we can bring we can something
the council can continue to to discuss
as the we go further along on this
process.
>> Ballot ballot language not isn't that
hard. I mean, we'll want to work
together on ballot language and the
ballot argument, but I don't see that as
something that we need a survey for, but
>> well, I think I guess I don't know. I
guess I don't quite understand what how
a survey helps us pass the bond. I see
where trust and information one-on-one
outreach helps us pass the bond measure.
I don't quite see how a survey does, but
I I already came out saying that's
>> we don't have to decide tonight. So um
and this was really really helpful. So
thank you very much for organizing and
for being here really illuminating.
Thank you.
» Okay. Now we are moving on to item
number 11. town council to receive a
presentation, provide direction to staff
on the scope and priorities for the
general plan update and consider
authorizing staff to initiate a request
for proposal RFP for consultant services
to assist with the general plan update.
Robera,
>> good evening mayor and council members.
So, if you recall in the August 2025
meeting last year, I presented a similar
item. It's really just a presentation to
let you know that the current general
plan has passed its horizon. It was
adopted in 2007 and it had an horizon to
2025 which was last year. Um, but having
said that, you know, there really is no
penalty per se for having an expired
general plan other than there could be
certain state grant funding that we
might not be eligible for and um really
a lot of that funding is related to the
housing element and a lot of housing
efforts. That was the last grant we
received which did go towards the
housing element update. And so some of
the options as laid out last year is
just doing a technical update and
refresh of the general plan. Um the RFP
could outline that. It sounded like
during the housing element, uh,
community outreach, there was some
interest in possible historic resources
and coming up with a, um, inventory and
historic context statement for some of
the historic properties in the town.
That's an option. Um, let's see. Another
option that was important to the council
and the compete and the community
members is updating and analyzing a new
land use for smaller non-conforming lots
like the ones along Bolinus and Popppler
Avenue. That's something we could add to
the general plan update. And then of
course you can do a very extensive
general plan update which would include
additional elements um extensive
outreach. Uh the good news is that um
the town has in the general plan fund
over $600,000.
So we do have the money for any of these
options should the council decide that
you do want to go ahead and proceed with
the RFP and starting the general general
plan update process. And I'm happy to
answer any questions and also just get
your feedback and direction.
>> Questions Terry?
So, Robera, can this be put off until
2027? Do we have to do anything about it
right now? We've got a lot on our plate
for the next 12 weeks.
>> Yes.
>> Can we just say we'll get to it in 2027?
>> I would love nothing more. I mean, there
is a lot on all of our plate.
>> Yeah.
>> Uh it's Rich's first week gone. So,
right, people are going, "Who's going to
do this survey? and who's going to look
at this drainage? And so I'm going John
Mo, right? I'm I'm call I'm also talking
to the interim town engineer. Um we did
have our first kickoff meeting with
Gendler and today we did have some
homework that was due. So yes, there are
certainly a lot of priorities that I
would say are probably above this.
>> I have had the same question. There are
no consequences if we put it off. You
know, I think we should. Okay. Thanks,
>> Robera. I'm wondering if you do you know
what the status is of the public works
director position as other people were
interviewing. I'm just curious what the
status is of that.
>> I believe Christa provided an update on
that. So, they did hire the town is
getting a um recruitment firm and I
believe interviews would be in October.
So, hopefully sometime around there.
But, you know, for the next couple of
months, we do have David as our interim
public works director and then we do
have a consultant who's our interim town
engineer and that's how we've been um
working through or filling that vacancy
for the time being. That's not to say
that people still aren't coming in or
talking to me and taking up my time
because they know I'm there and they've
talked to me before. I'm familiar. Yeah.
Bill, do you have any any questions?
>> No. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, public comment on this item.
Anybody online?
>> No one online, Mayor.
>> Okay. I'll just I'll just start. I agree
that I don't think we should be doing
this now. Um, we can revisit in August
of 2027.
Um, that's probably not going to be a
great time either, frankly. Um, but the other thing I just noted was just to
do the technical update was $400,000 and
then these adders are like another
hundred. So you get to 500 and then to
do the comprehensive is 600. So it
doesn't make sense to me not to do the
comprehensive once we're ready to do the
comprehensive. I remember from uh when
we did this um 20 25 years ago, it was
an extensive process that took about a
year and a half with tons of meetings
and workshops and building consensus and
um so it's it's a it's really involved
for the community as well as the
consultant. So I'm all for continuing
and doing this later.
>> Me too.
I mean, nobody ever wants to do these
things. So, I think whenever it comes
back, it's going to be a big project. I totally agree with that. The issue is
that I think the number one issue I get,
and I think a lot of people my age are
building, is the red tape, is the the
variances, is the process to get stuff
built in town is very, very cumbersome
and expensive. And um you know it's
something we have to address and you
know all these projects it's so
interesting when it comes here we three
projects I don't think anyone asked a
single question and we all just voted
them through and I I actually really
appreciate that about this council is
that we very rarely debate a lot of the
projects and and the ADR does a very
good job. But we we have to streamline
these processes for our residents. It is
the number one complaint I get over and they're like, I didn't I
thought the town was so great until I I
decided to build something. And then I
think at the table today, Elizabeth
heard complaints about the trucks and
the parking. And there's just things
about living in the town we need to
address. And uh this is the place to do
that. And and and so I I really feel
like at some point, maybe it's not
today, deciding this. So I'm okay. I
actually think I would wait till after
November so we the council is formed.
But it's something we can't just keep
kicking down the road because we're
really doing a disservice to the
residents by not addressing how the town
functions and what our vision is.
>> Can I comment? I I do think this
upcoming year we'll be asking people to
weigh in on the building and on the bond
measure and so I hate I I think it's
confusing to have them weigh in on
something else. Um I do agree there are differences of opinion about
how about building um but at the same
time you hear about the building issues.
You hear about people who want to keep
this is a lovely charming small town. So
I think that'll be an interesting
discussion to kind of balance people who
want to build with balance with the
character of the town. But I don't think
that we're ready to have that discussion
right now. I I think it everything
should be focused on the building and
the bond measure so that we try to get
unity around that and no not disunityity
around something else.
>> Bill, do you have any comments?
>> No, I I you know I'm I'm listening to
all of this other than that I think this
is is something that we could deal with
next year. U that that resonates. We we
really have our hands full right now.
>> Yeah. Okay. Um,
we don't need a vote on this, right?
>> Great. Okay.
Moving on to
number 12. Thank you, Roberta.
Town council to consider introduction of
ordinance number 738 to amend the town
of Ross municipal code to allow for
different project delivery methods.
>> David.
>> Good. Good evening, Mayor McMillan,
Mayor Proen Robbins, honorable council
members. I'm I'm David Kelly. I'm your
interim public works director and
project manager. Uh the item before you
this evening is first reading of
ordinance number 738.
would amend section
2.4 or excuse me, chapter 2.4 of the
municipal code. Uh this ordinance is a
reflection of the uh direction received
from council uh at your July 9th meeting
in which you received a presentation uh
by staff and Griffin structures
regarding alternative procurement
methods which included uh the
traditional uh design bid build but uh
additional procurement methods including
a design build and progressive design
build. And at that council meeting, we
shared staff shared with you that uh by a simple amendment of your ordinance,
it could enable uh council to authorize
the use of a design build and
progressive design build. So with the
town attorney's assistance, the uh an
ordinance was a drafted that would amend
the code to provide the council the
opportunity uh to utilize those
alternative procurement methods.
Included in your packet is a copy of the
draft ordinance. Uh, and tonight, this
is a hearing to conduct the first
reading of that ordinance. Uh, again,
the ordinance was drafted by your town
attorney's office. Uh, but staff is here
to entertain any questions as I'm sure
uh is your as your town attorney has
>> questions? Anybody?
>> Any public comment on this?
>> No one online, mayor.
>> Great. So, we'll bring it back for a
motion.
>> I move we adopt ordinance 738.
Oh, do I have to read it?
» Oh, I see. I So, I move that we
receive the inter
>> go to the first reading of ordinance
738.
» I'll second.
» Motion by Mayor Prom Robbins, second by
council member Dingley. Mayor McMillan.
Yes.
>> Mayor Potm Robbins.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Kercher.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Dowling.
>> Yes.
>> Council member Salter.
>> Yes.
>> Motion passes unanimously.
>> Thank you.
» Item number 13. Thank you, David. Town
council to consider approving the town
of Ross response to the Marin County
civil grand jury report entitled Better
Service at Lower Cost. Optimizing
essential services for the future of
Marin.
Zach.
>> Good evening, mayor and council members.
For the record, my name is Zach Kob
DeLeon and I am the town clerk and
senior management analyst. Agenda item
number 13 is in regard to the town's
formal response to the 2025 2026
Marin civil grand jury report. Better
service at lower cost optimizing
essential services for the future of
Marin. The report looks at more than 50
special districts in Marin County that
provide services like fire, water,
sanitation, and refues. It concludes
that their fragmented structure creates
duplicated administration, uneven
service and fees, and limited capacity
for long-term investment. It calls on
district boards working with the county
to pursue collaboration, shared
services, and where appropriate,
consolidation.
The report includes seven findings and
nine recommendations. Under state law,
the town is required to respond to all
nine nine of them within 90 days, the
deadline for which is September 9, 2026.
The town's draft response is included in
your agenda packet. In the draft
responses, the town agrees with findings
F1 through F6 and partial partially
disagrees with F7. Our partial
disagreement is narrow. We agree that
proactive reform is preferable to
crisisdriven change, but we don't accept
that the crisis intervention is the
likely default outcome. Many districts,
including those in the Ross Valley,
continue to deliver reliable service and
can pursue collaboration on a measured
timeline. Pace and sequencing
appropriately remain matters of local
judgment. On the recommendations, all
nine are directed to either the board of
supervisors or to the governing boards
of independently governed special
districts. As a general law town, Ross
has no authority to implement any of
them. So, the town's draft responses to
R9, R1 through R9 are that they are not
applicable to the town while noting our
support for the report's goals. Staff
recommends that council approve the
responses and authorize the mayor to
sign the response form. I'm happy to
answer any questions.
>> Questions?
>> Um, public comment?
>> No one online. Mayor,
>> great.
um motion.
>> Yep.
>> So, I I think it's important. Thank you
for drafting this. In the report, there
was um language about the the debate
we're having about our fire station that
was sent out to the public. And I think
it's important we address that in our
response. Um, so I have um I have
language that I'd like to suggest to add
to the document, which is that Ross is a
member of the Ross Valley Fire
Department. Neither the town nor its
residents have advocated for a
standalone fire station. And number two,
the debate has centered on whether to
reopen the Ross Fire Station to restore
emergency medical and fire response
times that meet accepted industry
standards.
Are we allowed to do that if it's not a
question that the grand jury is asking
us to respond to?
>> I'm happy to answer that question. So,
the response to a grand jury is very uh
is prescribed by the penal code of the
format that's before you tonight. So you
can certainly look at these findings and
make if there's a finding in there
that's drafted that you want to address
some of those comments to it have to be
within that context of the findings uh
that the town clerk has provided as as
the draft. Um but there's not some sort
of introduction or other area where you you come up with a statement of
it's you you have to respond to the
findings and respond to the
recommendations.
>> Okay. Okay. Well, I'm sure we can attach
it to one of the findings because for
some it's about having a standalone um
entity versus being part of a larger um
service area. I mean that's basically
even finding one the current fragmented
structure of special districts results
in unnecessary duplication of
administrative services and operational
efficiencies. We totally agree which is
why we're members of the Ross Valley
Fire Department. So I I actually don't
know why there's any objection to this
because we're actually already a part of
the fire district. Our fire is part of
the fire district.
>> Maybe if it's better for five. It says
service and pricing inequities currently
exist across Marin and may increase if
consolidation and functional
collaboration do not accelerate. And
your point is that we're not opposing
collabor. We're not opposing
consolidation. We're not moving towards
our own private station.
>> Correct. I mean, we can attach it to any
one of these, but because the grand jury
misstated
what what the town is doing and nobody
has advocated for that, um, we I want it
in the in our response. I mean, it needs
to be clarified, especially because it
was broadcast to the the community.
>> Actually, I did not broadcast erroneous
information to the community. I simply
quoted verbatim what the grand jury
report said and I happen to have the
quote right here which is the grand jury
said um the fourth rationale is a
textbook case of misguided civic
engagement at odds with effective
services today modern efficiency depends
on shared regional services not
maintaining standalone structures note
it does not say department it says
standalone structure es for symbolic
reasons building for yesterday. The
grand jury characterizes FOR's arguments
as emotional resistance to modernization
driven by small groups of residents who
lobby for outdated solutions that are
not based on current and future needs.
So I would oppose your characterization.
>> Okay. So the quote continues, Ross risk
profile has also changed stronger
building standards. Staffing a
standalone station is easy to demand but
difficult to sustain according to local.
So we're talking about a standalone
station versus being a part of we're
already part of the Ross Valley Fire
Department.
>> So I don't I mean Julie if you really
want to go there we could talk about the
police. We have our own police force. Do
you believe we should be getting closing
our police station as well and just
relying on you know centralized police
force? So th this is a we can take it
any direction you'd like. You brought
this into the public fold and I would
like it clarified.
>> All I did was quote what the grand jury
report said verbatim. That's all
>> I know. And and they misrepresented what
this argument is about. And so I think
we absolutely should clarify it for the
public because that is not been one one
piece of information. And the friends of
the Ross Firehouse have also clarified
that they were part of the Ross and they
sent a an a correction to the town. So I
don't know why this
>> other than unless you want to let's
reopen the talk about police station and
what you what what
>> that's a nonsequ it's it's the same
>> we're not the we're not talking about
that.
>> I do think it's I mean if you if there's
a role for putting in uh you know that Ross isn't focusing on a standalone
station in one of these findings. I'm
not opposed to that because Ross isn't
focusing on a standalone station. But I
don't I'm not quite sure which finding
it goes to and I'm not sure there's a
>> you're not I'm sorry, Elizabeth.
>> No, no. I'm just saying I see can see
that you wouldn't want to put it in
anyway.
>> Yes. It doesn't answer. It's not it
doesn't fit into the I mean there's so
grand jury when you're asked to respond.
It's it's
>> it's sort of black and white and you
can't add your own sort of other agendas
to it. So, does anyone besides Matt want
to add this uh language?
>> She does. So,
>> something about that Ross isn't focusing
on a standalone station under maybe F5,
but
>> I don't know that we have three votes
for that, but that's
>> Well, that's what I would I would be
okay with that because it's it's it is
sort of relevant. They're talking about
consolidation and they kind of made it
sound like Ross is working on a
standalone station, which isn't the
goal. So, but let's see what people
think. Well, the language says
standalone structure.
>> It says standalone station staffing a
standalone station
>> subsequent to the standalone structure.
Matt, it's focused on standalone
structure. So, I would be opposed to
adding anything to
that's not relevant to the responses
that Zach already drafted.
>> So, let's hear from Bill.
>> Poor Bill. Yeah, I I mean I hear your
point, Matt, but I I I I think, you
know, we we should just focus on a
specific findings uh and recommendations
as opposed to what else is in the
report.
So, no, I I would not be in favor of
adding this, although I do take your
point.
>> Okay. Well,
the council has spoken.
>> Do we need to make a motion to approve
this?
>> Yes.
Can someone make a motion, please?
» Um, I move that the council approve the
town of Ross's response to the Bane
County Grand Jury report and authorizes
the mayor to sign the response form.
>> Is there a second?
I'll second.
» Motion by council member Dalian, second
by Mayor McMillan. Mayor McMillan. I
>> mayor prom.
>> No.
>> Council member Kercher.
>> Hi.
>> Council member Dowling.
>> I.
>> Council member Salter.
>> No.
>> Motion passes. 32.
» Okay. Number 14.
town council to consider approving the
town of Ross response
to the Marin County Civil Grand Jury
report entitled MCE Marine Clean Energy.
A series of missteps highlight need for
governance changes.
Zack,
» good evening, mayor and council members.
Again, agenda number 14 is in regard to
the town's formal response to the civil
grand jury report, MCE, Marine Clean
Energy. A series of missteps highlight
need for governance changes. MCE is a
joint powers authority of 38 member
agencies across four counties which
include the town of Ross. It's
California's first community choice
aggregator, CCA, and one of the largest
serving more than 1.5 million customers.
As a CCA, MCE handles electricity
generation while PG&E still handles
transmission, distribution, and billing.
The report is critical of the AY's
governance practices. The report
includes 14 findings and 13
recommendations.
MCE must respond to all of them. Marine
cities and towns, including Ross, are
required to respond to just two findings
and two recommendations, F4 and F5 and
R5 and R six, respectively. On the
findings, the town agrees with both. F4
recognizes that MCE is a large and
complex agency and that board members
who are local elected officials have
understandably limited expertise in
energy markets and utility finance. F5
recognizes that board members face
competing demands on their time which
has affected attendance. On that point,
I'll note that Ross has made a
consistent effort to be represented
including sending an alternate when our
primary representative is unavailable.
On the recommendations, the town agrees
with R5, which calls for a process
ensuring the board member or an
alternate commits to attending each
meeting. The town partially agrees with
R six, which calls for prioritizing
appointees with the most extensive
financial and energy expertise. We
support the goal, but for a small
jurisdiction like Ross with a five
member council, it isn't always
realistic to have a member with that
specialized background. Our position is
that expertise is important, but should
be weighed alongside attendance.
availability, institutional knowledge,
and the ability to serve consistently
rather than being the overriding factor.
For context, MCE's executive committee
voted in July to form an ad hoc
committee to draft the agency's own
response, which goes to its full board
on August 20th. However, the town's
response deadline is September 14, 2026.
Staff recommends the council approve the
response and authorize the mayor to
sign. I'm happy to answer any questions.
>> Questions?
Um public comment.
>> No one online. Mayor,
>> thank you. Um bring it back for
discussion or a motion.
>> So um I have an issue with R six. I
think that we should be prioritizing um
you know financial and energy expertise
and it we do not have to appoint a
council member to serve on the board. It
could be a resident. It could be anyone.
And I do think that given that I am the
council member who has the most
financial expertise being a CFA charter
holder and I was removed from the
position for for talking about the
corruption that was basically coming out
in this report, we should say something
about that. Um because I don't I don't
understand why the person with the most
financial expertise that was asking all
the questions that ended up being
completely validated was removed.
I don't want to get into that, Matt. We
already discussed that when I removed
you, and I don't want to get into that,
but I will say very briefly that you
were not removed because of the
questions you were being you were
asking. You were removed because I
received complaints from four other
board members about your behavior,
>> which are which were never publicly
disclosed. And we had, I think, five
different board members uh submit public
letters of support. The mayor of
Belvadier, the mayor of Larks, who ended
up all the things that I talked about
were actually in this grand jury report.
Everything that I was working on that
you that you chose to hide the
corruption by removing me and silencing
me needs to be addressed in this R six
because why would you replace the person
who was actually advocating
>> then
>> for the reforms?
>> Ben, could we have a point of order
here, please?
>> Well, it's not a point of order. It's
the it's the agenda item. Yeah. We don't
address individual council members in a
finding to a grand jury.
>> Yeah. I understand you have a dispute
with the mayor about what led up to
your, you know, being uh taken off the
board, but we're focusing right now on
the language of R six and whether or not
we partially disagree or whether the
council thinks we should partially agree
or agree and the reasons for it. Um, but
again, it's not about you as a person
being taken off the board.
>> Yes, I hear you. So, I I think we should
prioritize people with financial and
energy expertise on this board. And in
fact that is the entire findings is the
board was derelictked in its duty
because it was inept to handle these
very complicated questions about the
energy market. So why would we not
prioritize people who have expertise in
energy and financial matters that makes
no sense to me.
>> It's my understanding that in order to
be um the liaison to the MCE board you
have to be an elected official.
So I think that the finding recognizes
that limitation. I know that MCE is
going through a very large governance
workshop right now and there'll probably
be some consolidation of board pieces.
Maybe they'll change the rule that you
have to be an elected official to get
people who are more qualified to serve
on the board. I don't know. But right
now, I think, you know, there's there's
a big limitation in the way the bylaws
work for that organization.
So, I think that's why we say it's a
worthwhile goal, but we're our hands are
tied. It has to be a council member.
>> But why wouldn't we prioritize
energy and financial expertise? That's
all the the language says. Prioritize.
It doesn't say you have to.
>> So, that would be my point. It says we
partially disagree. All this says is is
that we that people should reassess
appointments to prioritize those with
financial and energy expertise. That
seems fine. Yeah. So, I don't know why
we say partially disagree. I would say I
agree because it's only it's only
prioritize and we may well have other
reasons why our most financially expert
person shouldn't be on the board. Maybe
that, you know, maybe there's continuity
or something. But I I think R six should
be agree and not partially disagree.
>> It doesn't change anything for us. It's
just it's just a recommendation to
prioritize expertise and we can try. It
doesn't say you have to. So that's
because it says should reassess and
prioritize. So it's very um I think it
gives each council the the ability to
choose whoever they want but just with a
with an eye to keeping with an eye to
focusing on uh expert, you know,
expertise. So I would say my opinion is
this should be an agree just a straight
out agree
» clarify what you're saying. I mean the
other part of this is by December 31st
2026 you'll do all these steps. So I
think that's something
>> but it says should so we don't have to
>> if you're if you're agreeing you're
saying by this date you will reassess
you should reassess your appointments to
the chosen boards.
>> I thought but it will be because we have
a new council in November. So, of
course, it'll be reassessed.
>> I thought since it didn't say shall, we
didn't have to. I thought should was
sort of gave you some wiggle room. Um, I
mean, that's what the lawyers always say
like shall shall is required and should
is is room. So, I
>> I mean, if we do disagree, I think it
should be partially disagree. Uh, we
will focus on our appointments in the
future, but you know, so that we can get
away from that December 31, 2026 issue.
But otherwise, I think it's an agree.
So, do you think we can't say agree
because it says we should
>> partially disagree. You can say agree or
you can say partially uh you'd have to
say partially disagree. There's no
partially agree in the penal code.
>> Okay.
>> So, I think if you wanted to clarify
that you're going to do it
>> at our
time frame, then you could say partially
disagree. The criteria is something
we're interested in abiding by. the
timeline is going to be based on our
when we do our appointment process.
>> So we could say so partially disagree
and and the only comment is we we
don't we're not sure that we will be
getting to this by December 31 or just
>> we're going to have a new mayor and a
new council. I know but so it will
happen as a normal course of our
process.
>> I don't think we should be tied to a
timeline. I think
>> you're not tied. It says it literally
says should should reassess by December
31st. you should. It doesn't mean you
have to.
>> I think Ben is saying if we say agree,
it looks like we're agreeing to do this.
So why not say partially disagree? We
agree with uh reassessing, but we don't
agree with the timeline
>> or we agree with the prioritization. I
mean, you could say we agree with the
prioritization.
>> Sure. I mean, that's fine, too. We agree
with the prioritization, but we don't
agree with the timeline. And that's the extent of it. And that way,
we do agree overall with this with the
statement. we just don't want to be
committed to doing this, you know, come December.
I don't know. That that would be what I
would that would be my response.
» What do you all think? I
>> I'm actually fine with the wording as it
is. So, you
>> I'm fine. I'm fine with the wording as
it is here.
» Okay, back to you, Bill again.
I'm okay with the wording as it is, but
I'm also okay with Elizabeth's
suggestion.
>> Well, you got to pick one.
>> You gotta pick Bill.
>> Okay. As as it is, but we all know what
we're really talking about is when the
new mayor and the council get around to
making the appointments for the next
term.
>> I'm sorry.
>> Was that clear enough? Probably not.
>> We didn't understand you.
>> I don't think What is What was your
>> uh recommendation? Let's just go with
what what's in there.
>> Let's just go with what's in there. I
don't think we're gonna have a
consensus, Elizabeth, for your
>> for your thing.
>> Well, you but not without you. We need
you, Bill. Um
>> Okay. Well, then you
>> Okay, let's say we have Do we have three
with what Elizabeth suggested?
>> Well, I agree with Elizabeth. I will
agree.
>> Okay, then we have three. Okay, that's
good.
>> You agree with us? Okay, great. Thank
you, Bill. So, we're changing the
language to partially disagree
>> with the time. Like, we don't know.
>> I was just say partially disagree with
the timeline. Leave it at that.
>> Yeah.
>> Partially with the timeline, but
>> leave it at that. Yeah.
>> With
Yeah. I have one other comment that you
know I do think financial experience is
important, but it also mentions legal.
So, Matt, between the two of us, I have
the legal, you have the financial, but I
also have financial, but not to the
depth you do.
>> Team Bill, I know that.
>> Yeah. Okay.
>> So, are we keeping in this is a
worthwhile goal when making a getting
rid of all of it?
>> All the language. So, our only new
language is partially disagree. We agree
with uh uh with the recommendation but
disagree with the timeline.
>> Yes.
>> Do you agree with that bill?
>> Yes, that's fine.
>> Okay,
great.
>> So, is that is
>> So, we need a we need a motion then.
Well, so I move that for R six we um we
change the wording that says partially
disagree and then the text we delete
what's there and we say we agree with
the recommendation but disagree with the
timeline
>> second
>> I guess I can't
>> so it's like we yeah we agree with the
recommendations with the amendment to R
six as stated
>> why don't you second it I I I I can
second. I was Do you want us to That
could be the motion. I'm happy to make
that motion.
>> I I
>> We don't need to make it again.
Elizabeth made it and Matt, you seconded
it.
>> Yes.
>> So, just call the role, please.
>> Motion by Mayor Prom Robbins, second by
Council Member Salter.
>> Uh Mayor McMillan,
>> yes.
>> Mayor Prom Robbins,
>> yes.
>> Council member Kercher,
>> yes.
>> Council member Dalling,
>> yes.
>> Council member Salter,
>> yes. Motion passes unanimously.
>> Did I? No, I meant no. I'm sorry.
>> Okay, Terry changes her vote.
>> Motion passes 4-1.
>> Okay.
Number 15, town council to receive
a report on options for town council pay
and the accompanying survey of council
member compensation in Marin County and
provide direction to staff on whether to
establish monthly compensation for
members of the town council and if so
the amount up to the applicable
statutory maximum. Town manager Johnson.
Oh,
>> Zack,
>> I'll be taking this one as well.
Hello again, Mayor McMillan and council
members. Thank you for the opportunity
to present to you this evening on the
subject of council member compensation.
Agenda item number 15 ask the council to
discuss and consider establishing
compensation for members of the town
council pursuant to government code
section 36516.
Ross council members currently serve as
volunteers and receive no pay or
benefits. This item would establish
compensation for the first time. It is
not a raise because there is no existing
salary.
As a general law town, Ross is subject
to the state tiered salary schedule in
section 36516.
For our tier, towns with populations of
up to three 35,000 residents, the
maximum compensation for council members
is $950 per month. That figure comes
from Senate Bill 329.
Setting compensation is done by
ordinance and is entirely within the
council's authority. No voter approval
is required as long as the amount stays
below the $950 cap, but council may
choose to bring this to the voters in a
future election. State law also controls
the timing. Compensation cannot apply to
a council member during their current
term. It takes effect for each member
only as they begin a new term, so it
would phase in as seats turn over
beginning with the November 2026
election should council choose to start
the program this year. For context,
staff surveyed council pay across cities
and towns of Min County. The smaller
towns, including Ross, Belvadier, and
Tibberon, have historically not
compensated council members. Several
jurisdictions have recently increase
council pay with Mil Valley going to
$650 a month. Other cities with a
similar size population to the town of
Ross have increased council compensation
to $950 a month. And Neato and
Centerfell have higher compensation
based on their population sizes
exceeding $1,500 a month. The town of
Fairfax has set their council pay at
$300 per month for several years.
Regarding the financial impact, the town
has not included council pay in the
fiscical year 2627 budget. Because
compensation is treated as wages, the
town also pays employer payroll cost of
roughly 10% on top of the base amount.
Fully loaded, the five member council
would cost about $33,000 per year at 500
a month, about $50,000 per year at $750
per month, and about $63,000 per year at
the 95 or $950 maximum per month. First
year cost would be lower, as I mentioned
before, because the pay phases in as
terms turn over. Staff recommends that
council receive this report, discuss the
topic, and provide direction on whether
to establish compensation, and if so, at
up to what amounts up to the statutory
maximum. If the council wishes to move
forward, staff will return with the
enabling ordinance and the necessary
budget amendment. I'm happy to answer
any questions.
>> Questions?
>> Um, any public comment?
I'm going to read the public comment
that Charlie Goodman made at the July
9th meeting um from the meeting minutes
on it's on page 29. Charlie Goodman
expressed concern about the possibility
of compensating council members. He
shared that during his 12 years on the
council, he personally incurred expenses
while serving because he viewed public
service as a privilege and a way to give
back to the community. Mr. Mr. Goodman
emphasized that council members
volunteer significant personal time and
effort and are not motivated by
financial compensation. He acknowledged
that some other communities provide
stipens, but stated that he believes
Ross' tradition of volunteer service is
unique and that compensation would
diminish the nature of the role.
Any other public comment?
>> No one online, Mayor.
>> Okay. So, we'll bring it back for a
discussion. This is yours, Matt. So,
it's interesting because I really think
that, you know, the people who serve on
the council tend to be a lot older,
retired, and maybe financially secure.
And I think that we do a disservice to
the people who may want to run for
office. Maybe they have children. Maybe
they're lower income. And we offer no
compensation for the amount of time and
effort it takes to to to to work on this
council. And while Charlie Goodman may
be very financially secure and feel and
that he's entitled to his opinion, I
think that people should serve and run
for public office and not be worried
that they need to pay for someone to
watch their kids at night when they're
coming to to come to council. At RPOA,
we always struggled to get the auxiliary
members to come to the meetings because
they were at night and they could not
pay for or find people to watch their
kids. you need to think a little bit
beyond just being retired and wealthy in
Ross. It needs to be um we need to
promote all people of all income levels
to wanting to serve and run for office.
And I think that many of the problems
that come out of the council are myopic
because there's only one view expressed
on this council and it tends to be from
a certain demographic and we don't
represent the demographics of Ross and I
think that to encourage that this is one
step we can take to do that.
Um, I agree with Charlie. I I think it's
a privilege to serve and I think that
compensation, it's not a lot of money to
begin with. Um, but I think it somehow
cheapens the role. Um, so I would
absolutely not want to u start a
compensation for council members. Your
point about um expenses, I think that's
well taken. So, for example, uh I think
we already have provisions for um
reimbursement if there's if there's
travel or if you have to take someone
out for a meal. Not we don't take people
out for a meal as much, but if ever, but you know, maybe we should expand our
reimbursement policy to include a
babysitter at night. I mean, I hadn't
really thought of it until you mentioned
that. But but you know that might be a
way of making it easier for pe for
families with younger for people with
young children to serve. But I wouldn't
I I I would not want us to um provide
compensation for council members.
Well, I agree with Elizabeth and I agree
with Charlie. I think uh volunteering to
be on the town council in Ross is a
privilege and an honor and volunteering
is very noble to do that and uh
being reimbursed for the time. No.
>> Well, thoughts
question for Matt. Matt, how much do you
think the pay would have to be to for
example uh entice more younger people to
be on the council? I always my view
always was that that people were busy
not just with raising children but a lot
of other things when they were younger
later uh when when people are partially
retired or retired they have more time
but if we get back to the financial
thing what do you have some figure in
mind?
>> Oh I think a couple hundred dollars a
month is would be plenty. I think it's
also I mean from my experience you know
when you go out with a constituent and
you don't want to let them pay for your
coffee or whatever it is it's it just
gives you a little extra that you don't
feel uncomfortable paying for the
constituent. Um but I I think it would
help encourage people from different
demographics to know that there's some
level of compensation that they can rely
on. um because it takes it takes a lot
of time to do this job and and you you need to find coverage and I
think of single families, single
parents, I mean we can open this up.
It's it's not that it isn't a privilege
and an honor to serve. It's just
recognizing that we have lots of
different demographics and diversity and
the needs are different for people. So I think a couple hundred a month was not
going to break the bank of the town. And
by the way, any council member can
choose to opt out. You can say I don't
want the compensation. I think our
president does that and he doesn't take
compensation. So if you want to serve
and you don't say I don't want the
compensation, don't take it. But for the
people who need it or want it, it's
there for them. And it it's a little bit
extra to help them cover their expenses
because there's a lot of needs. Look at the time right now. It's 8:41.
And if you're a single parent, I don't
want you not to run for Rosstown Council
because you're like, I'm just going to
have to spend a lot of money on child
care or other issues. I just I really
see this as an issue that is a
non-issue. If you don't want the
compensation, don't take it. And for the
people who need it or want it, they it
should be available to them.
» Well, I mean, it's not just the council
meetings, you know, it's the other
meetings we all go to and the other
things we do. So, um,
I'd certainly like to see more younger
people on the council. I think that
would be very significant, but I I'm not
sure this would would make that much of
a difference, frankly, man.
>> But I would I would favor something like
compensation for child care and whatnot.
>> Yeah,
>> I I think that would be great. I just
don't know whe that's something we can
do. I suppose Ben, could we do it?
>> Ben, can we reimbursement? Can we
reimburse people for child care?
>> I'd have to look at that first under
existing reimbursement policy and then
under state law there's very strict
guidelines about what can and can't be
reimbured under those guidelines.
>> Yeah, I I think um my view is I guess
I'm more of a traditionalist along with
Terry and Elizabeth and Charlie. And I
also feel like the ADR people work just
as hard as we do. And there's other
committees that also work just as hard
as we do. So it would kind of become a
slippery slope of, you know,
compensating. And you look at the other
demographics who do not compensate, and
they're very similar to our demographic.
Um, and I also don't think that $200 or
$300 is going to make any kind of
material difference in whether someone
is going to serve on the council or not.
So I'm I'm keeping with the status quo.
That's my opinion.
So it sounds like we have at we have
four who want to continue maybe explore
reimbursement and Matt would like
compensation. That that seems right. So
maybe Ben, you could look into
reimbursement if that's something that's
feasible
for child care.
>> Mayor, mayor.
>> Yeah. May I I just would like to just
add one part about the reimbursement is
going to be difficult for staff to um
administer because you get into how much
is I mean it's not for staff to decide
how much you should pay your caregiver
and to get receipts and most people that
I know of that hire babysitters aren't getting receipts themselves
and there's tax implications. It's
really it's it's very messy. I mean, I
think it would be you could do something
like
where you you you have the compensation,
try to um match it to let's say you have
one meeting a month um and how many you
know the average amount of hours per the
meeting and then try to get an idea of
how much a a caregiver would cost and
then and use that um because we also
have to do payroll taxes and I mean
there There's just a lot that goes into
this and I I really don't want staff to
have to be in the position of um
approving reimbursement requests for
caregivers. I I see that as being really
problematic. It already is problematic
with reimbursement for travel and and I'm glad that the council very
rarely ever asks for that because it it
puts staff in a in a difficult position.
Thank you for letting me give you my two
cents. So,
>> so I I'm convinced by Christa's
comments. Um, I also think I mean it
isn't going to come up that often if you
have young children. I mean, it's great
to have different viewpoints, but
typically people with young children
don't run for the council because you're
so busy. So, I don't know that not
reimbursing for child care limits the
pool of candidates. So, I I'm okay to
just forget pass on the reimbursement.
But I thought it was I thought it was a
good idea, Matt. But I hearing how it
would be implemented, I think that we
should pass on that.
>> Okay. It's always good to hear back from
what our ideas are and how they reflect
on staff work. So, thank you for your
comments. So,
okay.
So we're ready to move on to number 16,
which is discussion regarding
implementation of the executed
professional services agreement with
Gensler for facilities master plan
amendment services.
» Good evening again, Mayor McMillan,
Mayor Prom Robbins, honorable council
members. Uh the purpose of tonight's
agenda item is to discuss how the
recently approved professional services
agreement with Ginsor is and will be
implemented. Uh specifically regarding
opportunities for continued
participation by both the citizens
advisory committee as well as other
community stakeholders during
preparation of this facilities master
plan amendment. Uh, as council's very
aware, on August 4th, you approved an
agreement that included a scope of work
with Gendler to prepare an amendment to
the town's uh, facilities master plan.
And that uh, scope included a very
accelerated 12week schedule uh, with the
objective of completing the amendment
uh, this coming October.
So, why is this item before you? Um,
following approval of the agreement, I
think it was uh, Mayor Prom Robbins
requested council discuss whether
members of the CAC should participate in
the regular project management meetings
between uh, town staff and Gendler. Uh,
want to note that staff, you know,
really carefully considered and
evaluated that request and also
considered the correspondence that was
submitted uh, by a CAC member that's
here this evening, Mr. Weiny.
uh the staff report that that uh was
included with this item attempts really
to accomplish two objectives. It's it's
one to maintain and support
opportunities for meaningful stakeholder
participation in the process but also to
preserve an efficient project management
structure that allows Gendler to
complete the work on schedule. Uh we've
already found this week our schedules
are all very tight. uh it's it's even
difficult to schedule meetings when
we're all available, but we're working
very diligently uh within that timeline
to get all of the work completed and get
those meetings scheduled. Um, one of the
kind of the key uh distinctions that I
think council should make is the
difference between uh project management
meetings and and stakeholder engagement
meetings. Uh our kickoff meeting on
Monday uh was to discuss you know
communication protocols to discuss
scheduling to discuss how we're going to
get our subconsultants under contract
and the work completed how we're going
to get the site uh how the team is going
to come out and conduct their their
sitewalk. So it's a lot of detailed
project management work and I don't
think that that's the objective that uh the the CAC is seeking. and I think
they're looking at how can they be
involved in some of the other elements
of the project and give council uh good
and positive feedback on some of the
work that's being done. Um
so you really want to highlight that you
the town manager has already expanded
opportunities for council input by
scheduling four four spe four special
meetings. I think those have all been
placed on your calendar. uh those will
provide for you know additional
opportunities for staff to bring forward
you know critical policy decisions for
your consideration. Um and and as part
of that that's an an effort for us to uh
you know engage with the community and
discuss with the community or at least
allow enable the community to to hear
what some of those critical policy
issues are. So, uh, what what staff
recommends if if council wishes to
expand the CAC participation is to
establish, uh, three mile stain
milestonebased
meetings with the CAC during preparation
of the facility master plan. Uh these
meetings would allow Ginsler to provide,
you know, key project updates, present
work in progress, receive technical
observations and comments and and
ultimately help identify matters that
could come back to council uh for for
policy direction. Again, noting council
council's the policy direction here. Uh
direction to Gendler regarding scope,
schedule delivers, deliverables, and
advancement of alternatives would
otherwise continue to be uh directed
through the town manager. um uh under
the professional services agreement of
course ultimately through policy
direction uh provided by the council. Uh
one of the things that your agenda
report discusses is opportunities for
broader community outreach. Uh we want
to note that the citizens advisory
committee is really not the only
stakeholder here. Um you know
particularly with regards to the civic
center of course you have your internal
stakeholders. you think of your police
department, think of your paramedics, uh
and we're also engaging with uh you
know, had a had a lengthy conversation
with the with the fire chief today. Um
and and those are critical stakeholders
that need to be engaged in this process.
So, there's opportunities to engage with
property owners, you know, certainly
your neighbors, the downtown, the Marine
Art and Garden Center, um, and and and
other stakeholders that you might see as
appropriate while again continuing to
provide and receive public input through notice council meetings. So, as
part of the professional services
agreement, uh, Gender's basic services
already include a a series of uh,
project milestone and meetings. Uh
again, you know, looking at that 12-week
schedule, we've got about eight meetings
included uh in in their in their scope
of work and it's clearly identified. Of
those, two are specifically uh scheduled
to bring those to to council uh which is
the uh administrative draft facilities
master plan and ultimately the final
master plan. So I think there's
opportunities to um with their proposal
is have a total of six additional
meetings. Three of which would be
scheduled uh virtually with the citizens
advisory committee again to give them uh feedback and overview of uh current
uh uh work to date. uh along with uh
three additional council meetings that
uh would provide uh opportunities to
bring back some of the key policy issues
to council on some of those meeting
dates that council has already
scheduled. The estimated cost for those
six meetings is uh $17,400.
Um and Gendler has advised that these
meetings can be incorporated within the
current project schedule. So that that
was that was kind of good news to hear
that. uh you know of course want to
caveat that that if as part of this
process and often what can happen is uh
the council can provide pro policy
direction that may uh require
substantial or significant revisions and
that could change the timeline uh that's
not anticipated or expected necessarily
just you know that's a cautionary note
um also I think what's important is to
speak a little bit regarding you know
governance
uh you know the town council clearly
established this policy. It's the town
manager's responsibility uh to continue
to administer the professional services
agreement. Um ultimately Gendzer is
going to provide those those those
independent professional uh advice and
they're going to send us invoices which
we're going to review. Um but the the
CAC's role as well as stakeholders would
be to provide uh valuable advisory input
to the council. Uh this the structure
that was identified in your agenda
report preserves accountability,
preserves transparency uh at a at a
relatively minor cost addition uh while
also providing the council to give you
know additional feedback that was you
know not built into the accelerated
project schedule uh uh that that came
before council.
So, so staff is really requesting
council direction uh again tonight
whether the council wishes to, you know,
establish those proposed, you know,
three additional meetings with the
citizens advisory committee. Uh whether
you would like us to uh build in some
additional uh community outreach and,
you know, I want to kind of hearken back
to the presentation that you had earlier
tonight uh from from Joy at Team Civics uh in regards to the value of
that community engagement. So I think
it, you know, she kind of sheds light on
some of the value that that can have.
Um, and with that, you know, I just want
to address a couple questions in advance
that council may have. You see, you
might ask, well, why can't CAC members
simply participate in in every weekly
meeting? Um, you know, I think our
answer is is that th those meetings
really function as as project management
meetings. You know, we're we're busy.
Uh, we have an hour. It's it's it's get
the work done. It's not not to present
information uh and and and you know ask
feedback. It's we're we're working uh to implement this critical project in a
short timeline. Uh the proposed
stakeholder meetings however would be
intended to provide meaningful
opportunities for the CAC to really ask
questions and and give Ginsler an
opportunity to present some of the
material that's been uh prepared to
date. Um you might say, well, why only
three CAC meetings? Well, we're on a
12-week schedule. We're one week into
that. We we uh you know are again
working diligently to uh you know to to
complete the uh amendment in time and
really to kind of target what are the
key deliverables and where is that
feedback going to be mo of most value.
Uh some potential items might include
presentation of the blocking and stack
stacking program to kind of see how that
relates and does that fit and validate
the CAC concept. uh presentation of you
know the massing the site analysis and
technical narratives and and maybe
presentation of cost estimates. So
that's just my take on what might three
meetings might look like. There's a lot
in that. Uh and those of course are are
similarly are those items are the things
that could be part of those three
meetings that come come back to to
council. Um again you may ask well why include the neighbors? Uh why
include the marine and art and garden
center? Well, um you know, there there's
a whole number of issues uh that this
the master plan amendment is going to
address as as we've talked uh quite a
bit about. Um you know, the building we all love the design. I think the CAC
did a a fantastic job, but there were
some there was still some work to do
regarding uh circulation uh access. How
can we tie in potentially Laurel Grove?
Uh do we have an additional access point
on on Lagonas? Uh what about
construction impacts? What about
sequencing? And can we maybe use the the
parking lot at Marin and Art Garden
Center? Uh you know, those those are
some questions that we may want to uh uh
answer as we go through this process. Um
so those are just some things for you
for to think about as part of this uh
agenda item tonight. That really
concludes my presentation overview.
There's quite a bit in the agenda
report, but happy to entertain any
questions that council uh may have about
this item.
questions.
>> Okay. Um I understand the three meetings
with the citizens advisory council,
those will be three one-hour um online
meetings.
Where is there an opportunity for Marin
Art and Gardens and um maybe the
neighbors and others to also hear what's
going on and to give feedback? Where
does that take place? in the town
council meetings
>> currently that is
that there is no specific uh community
workshops identified in the work that's
being performed by Gendler. Uh the
vision in part was to uh be able to
broadcast to that community as part of
uh the these additional uh council
meetings. Uh but if council desired,
that's certainly something we could, you
know, try to work with Gendler to
identify if we want to have, you know,
build in a community workshop uh as part
of as part of this effort and there's
value in that. But otherwise, we
certainly uh could do that as part of a
council meeting. Uh especially if it's a
special date where uh there's no other
agenda items, you know, uh through the town manager's office, uh
invite uh our stakeholders to attend and
participate uh you know, and and
specifically invite them to do that. So
there's there's some there's some
opportunities to try to uh engage with our our stakeholders as well.
>> Okay.
But, you know, again, given the
consolidated schedule and the desire to
that was something that was, you know,
kind of set aside because the the
schedule is just it's is just uh so
>> it's tight. Yeah.
» Do you want to
>> So, we hear a a lot of time um when
we're asking about items that, you know,
the staff, we don't have time for this.
We're we're small staff.
These are experts who've put together a
plan in four months that I think the
town took years to develop. Why not rely
and use these amazing resources
that you have at your disposal? Why why
not just include them in your working
group?
>> Well, uh I I I think council member
Salar, you know, tried to answer that
question. Um
you know, it gets to to project
management. Uh you know, it's it's it's
very um there there's a lot of work to
do and
>> No, no, but they're willing to raise
their hands and help. So, I I don't I
what I don't look at I look at this is group is you have at your
disposal incredible volunteer experts
that are highly motivated to get this
project done and know it better than
you. Why not just include if they're
willing to be a part of the meetings and
help move this project along, why
wouldn't you just want them to be a part
of the group? Well, I I'll give you an
example uh and maybe this will shed some
light um on your on your question. Uh
one of the requests of our meeting this
week was to validate the the space
program that was prepared previously
prepared by KPA. Um that is really an
internal engagement process with both
our police chief, our fire chief, the
paramedic authority, uh the planning
department, the town manager, the town
clerk, and um in in my view certainly uh
I think and I'm sure in Chris's view uh
that's that's best handled by by staff
uh you know to delegate that kind of you
know internal stakeholder work to a
group of outside I'm not saying to do
that. I So the whole thing is you you
want to have three extra meetings and we
we're supposed to pay extra money for
these extra meetings. Why not just have
them part of the working group? They sit
in the meeting there. I'm not asking you
to delegate anything that they wouldn't
do, but these people might be willing to
help out in other areas or have
expertise and be able to handle and help
with the project. I I think as we read
their their request um it was to ensure
that their professional input is
received in a timely manner before other
key decisions were made so that it you
you're uh avoided having to kind of
return back and you lose some time and
so uh that that's why I think the
structure was developed uh to to address
you know specifically their their
requests was to make sure they're prized
you not on a on a on a you know a month
a one month basis at council meetings.
It's their prize on some of the critical
uh updates that um uh are made by by
Gendler as part of their work. And this
is really about being strategic with
both their time, Gendler's time and and
our time uh and and and complete in
completing the work. I think that's
really the reflection. Um,
>> so you think they would slow you down?
>> I I think Well, I think there's an
element of when you have additional uh I
think as they they say uh too many cooks
ruin the stew. Uh and you know that
that's only an addage of course, but uh
you know we we we were we were work our kickoff meeting it was we went to
work very quickly. Uh I'm not sure
that's of value to the CAC members uh in doing this kind of working stuff. uh
that's really in my mind uh a staff's
role. Uh but where there's a lot of
value is on these kind of uh critical
uh bigger picture uh items that you know
like the blocking analysis, the massing,
the site analysis where there there's
going to be opportunities for some real
critical feedback and input before you
advance to that next stage. And I I I
guess we see real value in that. Um and you know it's respectful of their
time. It's respectful of Gendler's time.
It's respectful of of staff's time.
>> Okay. And one other question is just in
the scope. Why was schematic design
removed from the scope?
>> Well well schematic design I think uh
from my perspective I did not hear
council uh consensus that schematic
design was uh uh you know the direction
was to include the schematic design. I
know there was correspondence uh to that
effect that there was a view that it was
uh our intent was to um develop and
complete the master planning process to
provide a uh a a you know a complete
plan uh provide the project description
so we can begin SQUA and then uh very
importantly to have a cost estimate that
is going to support you know council's
's uh desire or or um inform council's
question is about whether to place a
measure on the ballot.
>> Yeah. So I just to be on the schematic
design point, the reason for it is to be
able to come up with a good cost
estimate. The schematic designs are very
helpful for that.
>> Um I just want to I just want to
interject here is that the schematic
design was not removed from the scope.
It was never in there. the council we
brought forward a request for proposals.
It did not include that the council at
length discussed this issue and there
was not con council consensus to put
schematic design um into the scope of
work. So it was never there. Therefore
it was not removed. So I just want to
make sure you you understand that
council member Salter. We did not remove
>> it was in the Gendler contract and it
was removed from the Gendler contract.
>> No sir
>> from the the original contract that they
proposed was never
>> No, sir. They responded to
the requests for proposals document that
the council
approved at a council meeting
>> and we when we um did bring the the uh
RFP forward, there's a presentation that
I remember outlined for council that
there was opportunities to go beyond you
know uh uh you know completing the
master plan which maybe included some
enhanced planning
doing some more uh uh you know more
detailed site work, not with the the
belief that it's necessarily going to
give us a better cost picture. It's
really just going to provide you know
more detailed site information uh for council's consideration. Uh but
council uh did not opt for that that option that was presented. So we
you know that that was not included. Um
I I kind of actually liked it just from
being a a planner. Uh but uh uh I again
we we just I'm just saying that because
we did provide council with that
opportunity and and council we didn't
get direction to include that in the in
the RP.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Is it is it helpful that
is it helpful to add some of that back
to get better cost estimates? My
understanding was that what we have now
is is is a master plan update that
doesn't move us closer to getting
something on the ballot because we don't
have a good enough cost estimate. So, is
it possible to add back some of that to
get a better cost estimate? Well, well,
Mayor Mayor Prom, I guess, um, I I would
just share with you, I think, in terms
of our analysis and in discussions with
Griffin Structures, uh, as well as
other, uh, municipal uh, staff, uh,
other city managers that we've had this
discussion with regarding uh, how
detailed do you get with your cost
estimates? Uh, you know, ultimately the gold standard is you go out to bid
and you know, sometimes if you don't
have money in hand, that's that's a
little that's a little late. Uh uh but
that that there are so many
uncertainties in the market regarding uh
tariffs
uh inflation rates uh you know material
unknowns and uncertainties that even
with schematic design. you're still
going to have contingencies that aren't
necessarily going to guarantee you a
better number at the end of the day
that's going to garner uh voter support.
uh you know a lot of when municipalities
bring forward measures for geo bonds for
projects and capital facilities
a big part of that is what does the
picture look like and what are the
services that is going to enable you
know kind of a lot of those things that Joy spoke to uh it it there's uh
it's not always necessarily
uh just exact confidence around the cost
of the project and of course council
still has to make a decision around, you
know, I think you mentioned it earlier
this evening, council member Salter, is
you the the the staff has this or the um
the the the the town has this budget
reserve and how do you want to factor
that in in terms of, you know, what you
ask the voters for? So there's there's
some complexities around, you know,
ultimately what your ask is of the
voters and it's it's not all going to
hinge on just how refined that cost
estimate is going to be uh in terms of
the uh you know delivering delivering
the project. There's there's so
what what we've been told based on
expert input is having a planning level
cost estimate building in appropriate
contingencies is more than sufficient to be able to go to the voters to get
their support uh for for a geo bond.
>> I also have something to add to that. I
think one thing we haven't talked about
but it was on an earlier agenda item the
alternative methods for contracting. The
more Gensler starts designing this and
doing more specific drawings, they are
going to disqualify themselves from if
the council later wants to do design
build. That's just a fact. So with the
more generic process that we're
following now to get a cost estimate,
they still will be able to build bid in
the future on a design build if the
council wants to go down that road. But
if Gensler starts getting very specific
about what this building looks like,
they they can no longer bid bid under
California state law on that design
build ultimate project. So that's one of
the other reasons why it's important to
make sure we don't have a contract now
that limits the council from using any
architects in the future.
So I have another question just
why do you think this has become so
controversial and such a big deal to
have one or two uh CAC members at the at
the what you call the project management
meetings. I mean I I see it as just uh
expertise, transparency, trust,
oversight. It's just it's not to derail
the process is not to take it longer,
not to have it take longer. I don't I
just don't understand. Why do you think
it's become such a big deal? It seems so
easy to me to say, "Great, let's all
work together."
>> Um, Mayor Prom, that is such a loaded
question and it's not fair to ask a
staff member. First of all, I'm not even
sure it really is a question. So, um, we have come to the council. You have
we brought you We have literally met
with you probably 10 times in the last
two and a half months with specific
agenda items gotten specific direction
from you attached the actual request
proposals attached to the contract. You
had the opportunity literally
nine days ago the council was here at a
special meeting. You had the contract
attached the complete every single page
of that contract was attached to the
staff report. You could have you you had
plenty of opportunity at that time, but
you directed me to execute that
agreement as is as it was attached,
which I literally did. I think I signed
it that night. It was executed
definitely by the next day. Gendler, our
project team, they immediately got to
work. We had our first meeting um with
us as staff on Monday. We had, as I
mentioned earlier this evening, we had
our fir we have we had homework. We had
we have deadlines today. The this is the
week that we're supposed to be um ve
verifying the programming. So, and we
are working very hard now that we have
set up these special meetings with the
council and you've set it aside on your
very busy schedule. We got to have
something we need to bring forward to
you. And as you recall, Mayor Prom, when
you and the mayor sat in with the
interviews for three the three top
architect engineering firms is that
every single one of those firms, their
project teams mentioned that it was
critical for them to be able to get this
project done in this aggressive time
frame. It was critical that they had
very fast decision making
decisions made by the decision makers.
And so one of the first questions this
past Monday that the Gendler project
team asked David and I was, "Okay, um,
David, are David and Christa the the
decision makers on this project?" And I
immediately said, "Well, no, the council is the decision makers, and
you have a lot of um, you have a lot of
complex
important decisions you're going to have
to make, and we are going to be bringing
them forward to you. We're doing it. You are the ones that put together this
12 12 week. It's I've been saying all
along it is very aggressive. So, we're
doing our best to meet it. Um
I'm just going to sidestep the other
issues, but you you do you do operate
under a council manager form of
government.
>> I guess one question when there are some
of the difficult tradeoffs um you know,
do does the road connect to Laurel
Grove? Do we do we have space for police
parking? Some of those uh how do we how
do we plan out the space? Will those be
things that come to the council so we
can share uh and the public can share
opinions one way or the other or will
those get decided in the project
management meetings?
» Um I Okay. Yes, absolutely. We have been
telling the council all along when you had your April 29th meeting and
again on May 6th and again on June 24th
and on June 13th,
these issues we have we have been the
ones that have been bringing forward
these highlighting these issues to the
council that are issues that need to be
addressed that are not in your preferred
concept which is now the CAC concept. So
absolutely, David and I are not going to
be the ones that are saying,"Oh, let's
get rid of that or let's do this." Those
are council decisions that you need to
make in a public setting so that you
have the opportunity from hear from the
public, not just from the CAC folks, but
the rest of your residents.
>> Thank you.
» You have any questions, Terry?
>> Questions?
>> Bill, do you have any questions?
» Okay. Um, any public comment, Dan?
>> Yeah.
» Do I introduce myself?
>> Um, first of all, David, I really
appreciate what you, you know, the
consideration that you've given um to
the letter that I wrote. The the intent
of the letter was not to make things
more complicated. actually um the design
process in a lot of ways can be a way to
bring people together and to build
consensus around ideas. And this project
as you guys know is a pretty contentious
project. And I think that
going through the first phase of work
that we did on the CAC committee, what
was apparent to me was the conversations
that we had, the transparency,
the expression of the different
viewpoints and considering all those
things and bringing them together
ultimately got us to where we wanted to
be. And I think the intent of of at
least my letter was to continue that
process. that design in itself is a way
to bring people together. It's a way to
consider different ideas. It's
ultimately a way to get to better
outcomes. It doesn't mean that we want
to do project management. We don't want
to do project management. But I think
given the time constraints, there are a
lot of very critical decisions that are
going to have to be made, I think, in
real time. There are certainly major
decisions that need to be brought to
town council, but there's going to be a
lot of other things that are going to
have to happen. And I think people who
understand the why behind those
decisions were made and participate in
those decisions will ultimately support
those decisions. And so I I think what
you've got on the table right now
actually is a good idea. I think it's a
really good idea. Add two or three or
whatever you think is appropriate.
meetings where you've got critical
issues, you want to talk it over, you
want to get input of two or three people
so that when we all walk away, we go to
the town, we're talking to all the other
residents. We're doing everything we can
to support what's going on and saying,
"Hey, yeah, look at this. Is it we we
had to do this, you know, make this
compromise, whatever it is, but
ultimately I think it'll get us to a
better place." And that's really what
the intent is. Um, on the on the drawing
side of the equation,
it is an update of the master plan.
That's exactly what Christa said. That's
what went out was a a proposal to update
the master plan. What what I think and
I'd like to take schematic design off
the table for a second because that's an
architectural term and it has got a lot
of, you know, content associated with
it. Really what we need is a set of
drawings that is going to get us closer
to a construction estimate that we can
hang our hat on. So I think it goes it
isn't necessarily a full set of what I
would call schematic drawings, but it
does mean doing some detailed plans to
make sure that the police department
actually lays out properly. Make sure
that the fire department, if we're going
to do it, lays out properly. Make sure that the offices for
the staff that we have the right number
of offices. Do we have the right number
of restrooms rather than just blocking
the space? Actually doing some layouts
which we would just call space planning
to make sure that functionally
everything works over and above that. We
do need site plans. We do need floor
plans. We need elevations of the
building, some sections through the
building and renderings and an outline
specification
that would get us to the point where
instead of carrying, as David knows, you
know, if we have a schematic block, you
know, a set of block diagrams, we might
carry a 20% contingency, maybe even a
25% contingency. But if we can get it a
step further and add just another layer
of detail, take that down to 10%. And I
think or maybe 15% or whatever it is,
whatever we agree based on the
information we have that makes sense. I
think from a town perspective, the other
our our the other residents of the town,
we want to be able to we don't want a
lot of fluff in this. We want to make
sure that this is as tight as we can so
that when we do bring it forward, we're
bringing forward the ideas. we make sure
that the ideas work and we have a really
good idea of what it's going to cost
knowing that there are variables that we
can't control. So I mean I would be an
advocate of doing a little bit more
work, not a full set of schematics. It
doesn't preclude doing design build
design assist whatever we want to do
downstream. That information can be used
any way that we want to use it moving
forward, but it gets us closer to where
we need to be in terms of getting the
right kind of financing package put
together for this project.
So that's it. And that letter was from
me, not the CAC, just so you know.
>> Thanks, Dan.
» Good evening. Mike Rosenbomb. Again, I
have a novel idea for the town and one
I'm very disappointed that our chartered
financial analyst didn't think of, and
that is asking for to pay for the
$17,400
and any ancillary costs they would like
for additional meetings. They claim to
have 2.1 million in pledges.
Seems like a great place to come up with
17,500 for the meetings. Thank you.
Any
online comments?
>> No one online mayor.
>> Okay.
>> So, we'll bring it back for further
discussion. Um, I I think what you and
Christa have outlined in terms of adding
more meetings and more public outreach
is really good and really helpful. Um,
so I think that that was a great way to
address the CAC's concerns. I'm also
concerned, you know, if you allow the
CAC to participate in project management
meetings, then it seems like it's kind
of a slippery slope. You need the the
police chief and the fire chief and the
paramedics and, you know, where do you
stop? So, I think that the public
meetings that count I I assume council
can participate in those meetings, too,
and we'll all learn a lot. I think
that's a really good way to get the
feedback on the big milestone issues
that are there's going to be lots of
tradeoffs and it's there's going to be
really hard decisions that are going to
have to be made and we want the public
to weigh in. We want the CAC to weigh in
um and help us figure out what the best
decision is for the long term of the
town. Um,
I I I want to make sure that everyone's
comfortable about the um planning that
we're doing to make sure that we have as
much confidence in the cost estimate as
possible. Um, and so I just want to be
sure that everyone's happy with the
level of detail in the contract. I don't
want to be sitting here in October, you
know, scratching my head saying, "Well,
we should have done more. This isn't enough." Um I think, you
know, we want to have as much
specificity as possible. We but we don't
want to preclude Gensler from being um
available to bid um in the long-term
project. And and there are going to be
tons of variables that are way beyond
our control. So like are we still in a
war, right? Gas, tariffs, etc. cost of
copper. Um so I just think we if to the
extent that we could have additional
assurance perhaps from Gendler that the
level of work that they're going to do
is adequate to have the best cost
estimate possible. Um that that would be
helpful to me. And and mayor uh to your
point on the cost estimation, we as part
of our review of Gendler's scope of work
and and certainly the other consultants,
we we did verify that they all have
professional cost estimators on their
team and Gendler's scope does include
that. And we we believe they that
they're you know they they meet their
professional requisites to uh you know
uh provide us with a cost estimate
that's going to uh be very meaningful
for you know council's you know review.
It's probably going to be you know a lot
more detailed than than what was
provided in the original facilities
master plan. uh you know given the the
um the type of of uh cost estimator
that's being that's you know Gensler has
included on their team.
>> So I I I agree about the meetings. I
think I think the more outreach uh the
more participation is uh it benefits
everyone. Um, it sounded like Dan was
suggesting that the this process include
a little bit more, not so much that we
don't have the option of, you know, the
progressive design bid, whatever, but
that that that GE will do a little bit
more to give us so that we would be in
the be able to do a cost with a like a
15% contingency and not 25. So, is that
something that's reasonable to to add on
what small amount additional he he was
mentioning? Um, I I'd like to answer
this question. Um,
if the council's priority is to have
this done in 12 weeks, you need to stick
to your scope of work that and the
agreement that has already been
executed.
If the consensus of the council is to
add a little bit more, and you know, I
have greatest respect for Mr. whiny, but
that's all a little vague. Okay,
detailed planning, like what exactly
does that mean? How does that translate
into a specific scope of work? Because
remember, part of the role of your
professional staff is we track the
money. We make sure that before we pay a
bill that the work has been done and it
has been done in accordance with your
contract. So our scope of work is not
vague. It's so if the consensus of the
council is this evening that you are
interested in doing a little bit more
then what we will need to do as staff is
we will need to go back. So work is
going to stop.
We're going to stop on this and then we
need to go back and we need to spend
time with the consultant team, come up,
go do go back and forth. And it, let me
tell you, doing getting this contract so
that I could bring it back to you on
August 4th was a huge lift. It's not
going to happen by your next meeting on
August. It's going to be maybe we could
do it by September 10th. Maybe. then there's no way that you're going to
get this done in the timeline. Now, if
the timeline no if it doesn't matter to
you anymore and the consensus of the
council is you want us to do a little
bit more then that's what we'll do and
we'll have to come back and we'll you
know it it'll just it'll just be a
delay. So then I think you you it would
behoove you to think is that delay
what's the value of that delay? What's
it going to get for you? But Christa, I
don't agree with that. I mean, if we
were working for 12 weeks and then we
decided to extend the contract
>> after the 12 weeks and add on layouts,
it would just be an amendment to the to
the contract to add more. So, I I don't know that we need to redo the
whole thing, stop all the work, stop all
the meetings. We're saying, you know,
there may be a possibility down the road
that we're expanding the scope as we go.
And I I don't I don't I actually think
it's a disservice not to have layouts
done given that there's a lot of
programming that needs to be for
complicated police, fire, etc.
>> So just today, David and I were in a
meeting almost two hours going through
the packet of information that the
Gendler Project team gave us and our
comments are due today because we know
what David's going to be doing before he
goes to bed tonight is making sure he
puts together the comments from all. So
David and I are going through all these
tables and when Mr. Weiny mentioned an
example of restrooms, we spent a
considerable amount of time because what
Gendler had put together only had one
restroom for this building and I was
like wait got to have more than one
restroom for this building because when
we have a break there's usually more
than one person that has to use the
restroom. I mean we are going through
lots of detail already because we need
to get this done. and Gendler gives us
assignments and we need to do our part.
So if it was a specific thing like at
towards the end if something else is
needed the contract that we have with
Gendzo right now would allow us on a
time and materials basis to do something
you know something as specific and if
it's something really specific I I feel more comfortable as a town
manager saying okay you know it's become
apparent in this process because
remember
this this this concept includes cludes
looking at reusing a building, right?
There's a lot of unknowns. So maybe
something does come up in this process
that I could just quickly under my
purchasing authority
um amend the scope of work and get done,
right? But that's specific. But this
whole thing about a little bit more, no,
I'm not comfortable adding on a that
such a vague scope of work. I'm going to
bring that back to the council. So, I
even if we can still do a little bit of
stuff now, it's not going to be like we
are charging forward right now because
the council told us 12 weeks.
» Oh. Um,
» for now
>> I did, but it's okay.
>> If I if I can add, mayor,
>> can we just let the council talk for a
minute? I just we're never going to get
out of here if if we can't all share our
thoughts.
» Um
I think it I I think it would be
advantageous to do I'm sorry about that.
Um
it would make sense. I mean doing space
plans is not that complicated. They're
going to do the team is already going to
be working on block plans. So, they're
going to have how much space we have for
the police department or office space or
whatever. taking that the next step to
do some sketches to show
conceptually where do the offices go?
How many offices do we have? How many
bathrooms do we have? Do we have locker
rooms? Do we have shared locker rooms?
Where you know all the sort of the the
next level of detail in terms of making
sure that that building works is not
that complicated. It isn't that
complicated, but it goes a long ways to
having the people who are looking at it,
who care about these things, really
understanding that it works other than
showing them a block of space for a
police department. Is interesting
because when we had the police chief
here, he was saying, "I need an evidence
room and I need a place for to for
weapons and I need, you know, this
storage and I have drug store." all
those kinds of things that he was
talking about. He's absolutely right. We
got to make sure that those things are
taken care of. So, so all I'm saying is
that and I'm speaking as an architect
now, not Gensler or any that doing the
space planning is not that complicated.
The from an architectural standpoint,
we already will have asbuilts of the
drawing of the buildings. So doing
elevations of the buildings to
understand how much window area do we
have, where are the windows located, you
know, are we going to have those outside
decks? Are, you know, what kind of roofs
do we have to repair versus, you know,
new roofs or whatever it may be. the
elevations of the building, just some
plans of the building, a section through
the building. So really structurally how
it works goes a long ways for a cost
estimator to be able to say, "Okay, I
get it right. I understand, you know,
what needs to be done versus doing block
plans." That's all I'm saying. Well, you
can we can do block, you know, we can do
block plans. We can do exactly what
we're saying, but we're going to have to
carry a bigger contingency, right? You
would have to say that. I know you got
to say you have to have a bigger
contingency. The more detail you have,
the better the cost estimate. I'm more
concerned about
the constituencies out there who need to
be assured that everything is working
the way that they want it to work in
order to support this and get the kind
of community behind this to get this
approved. And that's really what it's
like that next level of detail, whatever
you want to call it, but enough
information that they can go out there
and say, "Yeah, this is it. you know,
this works. This is didn't get exactly
what we wanted, but this looks like it's
going to work and let's move forward
with it. So, that's, you know, that's my
two cents on it. I just don't think
>> Can that be added on without a a project
delay?
>> Pardon me.
>> Can that be added on without a project
without
>> They'd have to talk to Gensler and ask
him. And I I think actually the the the
question for Gensler would be based on
what we've asked you to do in the scope
of work right now and what we've
outlined, do you think it's adequate to
get a construction estimate and a cost
estimate that we can hang our hat on to
go forward with the bond?
>> Okay. So that was already in the RFP.
Pardon?
>> That that was already in the RFP. That
was in the RFP. that that was that was a
goal of this of this exercise. We there
is there is no one that is more
concerned about making sure that this
project meets our operational needs.
I've said to many of you, it's not my
town. I don't I don't care what it looks
like. It I want it to meet our
operational needs and I want it to be
something that we can afford and is is
done in a fair legal manner. Um, and so
that's what I'm I you know, and and when
you
>> want to say, it's funny because I think
I feel like we're saying exactly the
same.
>> Exactly. But we already have this
information when you use when you use
the police chiefs. We already have I had
a conversation just this afternoon with
our police chief because he said he
wanted to make sure that the locker
rooms are for women and men. And I
diligently we looked back. Absolutely.
Because it's it's a law. We have to have
it. So we've already done so much of
that. And
>> sure. I think the difference is Kristen,
when you take that program to a block
plan, it's a block of space. When you
take it to the next level of space
planning, sometimes that block of space
works and sometimes it doesn't. And
sometimes you got to start modifying
your program to make it work, especially
in a building that's going to be an
adaptive reuse. It's not going to be
perfect. You know, block plan and space
plan is one level of detail. the next
level of detail just simply gives us
more information to get us a better a
better cost estimate and a better sense
of what the scope is. That's all the I'm
not saying we can't do it with a block
plan. It makes sense you could. All I'm
saying is that I guarantee you the cost
estimators are going to carry a larger
cons contingency based on a block plan
than they will detail space planning.
That's all. So,
» yep.
» Well, all of us all of us agreed to the
contract as it was written on August
4th. Correct.
We read it. We agreed to it. Well, I I
actually had several questions about it,
but was told that if we try to change
it, it'll be weeks to get it going back
and forth and then it's better to to
start with this and if there are
anything we want to adjust, we could possibly adjust moving
forward. So, that's where I kind of feel
like we are now with anyway, I didn't
want to interrupt you. Go ahead.
>> No, it's okay. No, it was a question
that I asked. I asked the question. So,
yeah, I didn't I did not get that
information. I read it. It made sense to
me. I supported it. So, um I would
really like us to move ahead. I keep
worrying about this delay, that delay. I
mean, this has been We've had delays for
how many years now with this uh Yes.
Right. Exactly. for a long time. Let's
move forward. Let's uh deal with the
contract as it's written.
Uh let's add the additional six meetings
that Gendler would have with the three
would be with the citizens advisory
group which I think is a great idea.
There's three more town council meetings
that's thrown in. My my caveat was I
would trust the staff to figure out a
way to make sure that those other
stakeholders,
not just the citizens advisory council,
but the other stakeholders have an
opportunity, whether that's at a council
meeting or one of those three meetings
is just for the council is set aside for
other stakeholders. I want to make sure
you've got the stakeholders
uh covered and not just CAC.
So, I I agree with all of that, but in
addition, you know, I'm swayed by Dan's
comments about space planning could be
useful and it isn't and it's not that
hard to add on and it will give us a
better sense of how well this design
functions and a cost estimate and it it
can be added on without a delay. We
don't have to stop the pro we don't have
to stop anything to add what it what's
he described as space planning towards
the end of this 12 weeks. What does that
mean? It won't be It's not a hard It
won't take a lot of time. What does that
mean? It won't take a lot of time. It's
not hard to do. What does that really
mean?
>> I mean, I'd ask Dan, but it sounded like
it wasn't, you know, a major addition.
We'd have to hire us.
» He needs to speak up there at the mic.
>> Well, he was saying to ask Gensler, do
we think what we're doing now is
adequate or should we add in space
planning? Maybe that's the way to go.
So I I would like to first start off
with the space planning is sort of not
on this item. It's not in the staff
report. I think we can address the space
planning later. Like it doesn't tonight
need to be determined while you're doing
a project. You can always add things and
amend them. And I think Christa, you you just said, "Hey, I want to come back
to you for a big thing." So let's do
that at another time. We have tons of
meetings coming up. we can decide
whether we want to add space planning or
not. I don't think it needs to be done
tonight. The question before us tonight
is how do we integrate the CAC into this
process? That's really what this item is
about.
>> I appreciate the offer for three
meetings. I think what is clear and the
fact that we keep asking Dan to go speak
at the mic because we care what he has
to say is the CAC isn't magic or some
constituent. They are the group that
created this plan that we all seem to
have adopted and we're sort of trying to
move forward without them seems
ridiculous. These people are experts.
They're willing. I mean, the fact that
they're just here tonight at 9:30 and
good to see you too, Mr. Cool. You know,
is showing a dedication to this town
that we need to really embrace. I think
they should be at every meeting. I think
that they this group has come together
with a great plan. Why would we exclude
them from any meeting? It just it makes
no sense to me. I don't think they're
going to slow you down. I think they're
going to add so much value. Why would we
not take it? You have literally some of
these the most experts that you have in
the world are sitting right in this
room. So, just include them in the
meetings. I don't think they're going to
ruin it. I actually think they're going
to help make the plan work better
because they've already come this far.
So, why would we just handcuff them?
Just bring them into the meetings and if
they're annoying or they're doing
things, you just say, "Hey, thank you."
Well, uh, I think you can manage a
meeting very well, town manager Johnson.
I'm not
>> two of them are running for council, and
you really expect that staff is going to
go, "Oh, council, council candidates,
you know, I don't like what you're
saying. I don't like what your tone is."
>> Okay, first of all, that's impossible.
>> First of all, there's ways, let me
speak. It is my turn. Is that you, you
know, we're not saying you have to have
all 10 members. Maybe it's two or three
of them attend. I don't know. is choose.
>> No, I I think it's worth a discussion
with them about, hey, I think obviously
Mr. Weiny is got everybody's support to
be there. Maybe it's two or three other
people from that committee that want to
come and meet. And guess what? They're
busy people. I mean, they maybe can't
even attend all the meetings. Maybe they
send one representative. I just don't
know why we wouldn't include them in
this process. It seems sort of foolish.
Like, they've gotten us to this point.
let's like use them and then uh move
forward. You just setting up three extra
meetings doesn't seem it seems like a
total waste of time and money not to
just have them at the meetings as an
optional attendee to provide input. I
just I don't get it.
>> I I think I think we're kind of beating
this horse dead. It seems like there's
consensus to embrace
>> haven't even heard from Bill. Well, I
just let me just summarize because I
think we heard from Dan that the
additional three meetings is a great
solution. I mean, Dan agrees with that.
So, I don't think we need to keep going
around and around about whether the CAC
or any other member should be part of
the project management staff meeting,
weekly meeting. Um, I think Christa came
up with a really good solution to um,
encompass the information and everyone's
going to hear the information at the
same time and be able to weigh in and
it's ultimately the council who needs to
decide. Um,
and I agree on the what with what you're
saying in terms of the um,
the schematics or you know more detail
or I I just I think from my standpoint I
think it Christa, it would be great. Or
David, if you could just say to the
Gensler people, hey, is this going to be
enough? I know what's in the contract,
but I we don't want to be sitting here
in October and having someone say, well,
you know, you didn't do enough work. The
contract was too limited. The
contingency is too big. And we have to
be flexible and nimble. and that this
issue I think it just is is a 15-minute
conversation with the Gensler people.
Yes, we have confidence in how this is
going to go down or maybe we need to add
a little bit a little amendment to the
contract to encompass a little more
detailed planning. As I mentioned, there
is already there's already language in
the existing contract which states that
if we need additional services, we have
that ability to do that.
>> That's great. I just don't want to be I
don't want to be in like October 1st
freaking out that we need this
additional information. And I think we
should ask right now and then if we
don't need a great if we do need it then
it can proceed in parallel with this
other work that's going on so that when
we come to October 22nd or whatever the
date is we're ready.
>> So the RFP clearly stated that was the
town council's goal. We asked the
consultants to tell us to give us a
proposal for what they thought that they
needed to do to get to that point.
So, um, it's not a good negotiating
strategy to go to a consultant and say,
"Are we paying you enough? Are we giving
you enough hours? How much more can we
pay you?" So, I absolutely I'm more than
happy to answer ask them that question.
But there's also I don't think you're
going to get the certainty that you're
looking for, mayor.
>> I think we're never we're never I agree.
We're never going to have perfect
certainty. there's going to be a
contingency for all the reasons that
David said in addition to, you know,
trying to rehab a very old building. Um,
but
and and Gendler is our architect and you
know, when I was a lawyer, if my client
asked me something, I had to be ethical
and I had to give an honest answer. And
so, I have confidence that if you ask
Gensler, they're not they're not going
to be like kaching kaching kaching.
they're going to be like, you know,
maybe we need to do a little bit more or
maybe we don't and we don't want to
disqual qualify ourselves by doing
schematics and not being able to, you
know, bid for the for the penultimate
project. This is just a small little
project. I just want us to be as
prepared as we possibly can. Maybe
they'll say, you know what, Christa,
this contract is perfect. We're going to
have so much information and our cost
estimators, our cost estimators are
going to be perfectly satisfied and the
contingency is going to be a reasonable
contingent contingency that every other
project is going to have. We're not
going to be an outlier. But, you know, I
think if people are telling us this now,
we we need to address this and and be
nimble and, you know, if we need a
little amendment to the contract, great.
I mean, this is the biggest project that
this town has done since 1927.
And you know, I don't want to shoot
ourselves in the foot, but I think the
council would be willing to pay more now
to have more certainty later to be
assured of passing a general obligation
bond and have our citizens have
confidence in what we're doing. So, I
don't think it hurts to ask the
question. I have full confidence that
you and David can ask the right
questions and you know come back with
whatever answer and maybe it's just
within your spending authority and you
can amend the contract.
>> It's space planning we're talking about.
Is that what what
>> Yeah.
>> Okay.
>> So, um I I'm absolutely David and I can
ask them more detailed questions about
their cost estimate. Um I I want to let
the council know though
we cannot maintain this schedule if we
continue to have these fire drills by
the council every week when you when we
are continuously faced with all of a
sudden oh my god right before the
meeting we have to sc you know it's we
cannot get our work done we cannot get
our work done so if what happens at the
next you know on the next meeting if I
have one or two council members are like
we because you have a certain member of
the public in your ear and you want us
to amend the contract and we have to
stop what we're doing and we have to
figure out okay what exactly are they
want us to do what does it mean how much
it will it cost can they do it and and
you have to keep in mind it's not just
us just this past Monday we spent an we
had an hour meeting with our Gendler
project team very important kickoff
team. We spent half the time talking
about how doing this doing these
additional um meetings. Half of the time
and then we're one of many clients they
have. So the meeting was done and we
couldn't even get through. We couldn't
get through it because all of a sudden
we're completely changed because you had
one community send you a letter at 7:45
on Monday morning and now we're all in a
roller coaster. So I really urge you to
let us get through this. Let us let
Gendler do their work. Let us do what we
need to do. We have assignments that we
have to do. We have that we had um a
consultant here today um doing laser scanning and we have to work on
getting you know we we are obligated to
do all these things. We can't do it if
we're continuously responding to council
member lastm minute
changing direction. So, you know, I I
just think that we all want the best
project possible and and we all want
this to succeed and if people are
telling us things, we we kind of have a
duty to raise it so that, you know, the project is successful and the bond
passes and and I I really understand and
appreciate, you know, the the scheduling
and the ball juggling, etc. Hopefully,
this won't keep happening, but our our
all of our goals is the same. We want
this building to be built to accommodate
all the functions that may or may not
happen and using the beautiful design
that Gendler and Dan Weiny has proposed.
So, there, you know, there's going to be bumps in the road
and we have we we all have to be
flexible. Um, and you know, I think you
just need to have a conversation with
Gendler and, you know, kick the tires a
little bit. And may maybe this isn't
necessary. Maybe it's already
encompassed, but maybe it needs to be.
That's that's all that we need to do. I
think I I I don't think anyone's trying
to make a mountain out of a molehill.
We're just trying to, you know, do the
best thing that we can. So, Bill, did
you want to say anything?
Well, I you know I I appreciate
everybody's concern, but sometimes, you
know, you can overthink things and
sometimes you can spend too much time
planning because everything's going to
change anyway. And I, as we've been
discussing this, I've had this sort of,
you know, reflection on when I led teams
of attorneys and everybody wanted to
have their two cents and the client
wanted me to meet with them every
morning and so forth. But, you know, as
the lead trial counsel, you've got to be
ready to go and put put witnesses on the the stand. And so, I I have some
sympathy for Kristen. She's got a huge
scheduling process and and uh I I do
think there's a there's a danger of too
many cooks in the kitchen here. I just
think we need to get going. I like I
like that plan of the you know the three
additional meetings and I think we
should get going and I I think that we
will we probably will change some of our
approach as we go along as we get more
feedback. But trying to plan it all in
advance and anticipate it. My experience
in real estate and in trial work is
plans are good. You should have a plan,
but you should realize that you will
have a different plan when you get to
the end of it. That's just the way it
goes. I don't mean to sound cynical, but
that's just my experience. And I do have
a lot of it.
>> And I just I mean I don't think we're
responding to just like a a community
member. I mean, we're responding to I
mean lit literally the architect of the
whole plan who has a lot of experience.
So I I think I think you know the more
we hear from everyone who's involved and
has experience from town staff, town
planner, architects, the better off
we'll be.
» Yeah. I mean I I'm just going to I like
it seems like everyone's on a consensus
for three meetings, but there's the
elephant in the room is we have
incredible talent led by Dan Weiny and
they just need to be incorporated. So
that when there when we have to hear
from very valid concerns that aren't
being incorporated in this process,
we're going to bring it up and I that's
our duty.
>> Well, probably the earlier things are
incorporated, the better. So if you know
if we'd heard a few days ago or maybe at
the day of the contract, you know, um
what is it called? Space planning should
be part of it, we could have thought
about it. I think again it it takes a
lot of conversation and a lot of
discussion to kind of adapt as we move
forward with what's a great contract and
a great architect firm, but I think
there will be some back and forth and
changes as things come up. Like Dan
saying, space planning is helpful. So,
we try to fit it in. I think
all I have to say is let's get going.
I agree with that. Okay.
Um,
>> do we need anything? Do we need a
motion? Do we need anything?
>> No, we don't need no motion. I think we
have enough direction.
>> You have enough direction.
>> We have enough direction to move
forward. Thank you.
>> Okay,
then we are moving to item number 18. No
action items. Um, council
correspondence,
future council items, anybody?
And lastly, council member participation
at the communication table at the post
office on September 10.
» Were you in no show today?
>> I forgot.
too. I didn't do a reminder.
>> Um well
>> I can't. So help me out.
>> You guys can tell me later um if you are
a available on September 10th. I I
should be able to do it. I'm just seeing
I should be able to do it number 10.
>> Okay. Um the last Oh, meeting evaluation
number 19
>> comments.
» Was what?
>> It was
>> a little heated. And I I think I would
just recommend that we be careful. Ben,
you're usually pretty good about
reminding us. Yes.
>> Don't talk over somebody else. If
somebody's talking, do not let them
finish. Do not talk over them. And I
think we should also be pretty
thoughtful about how long we each speak,
too.
>> So,
I did think it was helpful, Julie, when
you know, we we made comments and then
we commented after our comments because
I think for some of these controversial
issues, you want to hear what people
say. You might change what you say. You
might want to rebut what they say. And
that I think that that for these issues
I think that's helpful to have some back
and forth, you know, sort of a row of us
and then again. But I thought that was
very helpful.
>> Okay. Bill, do you have anything to add?
>> No, I don't.
>> Okay.
>> I'm sleepless in Seattle. That's why I'm
kind of drooping here.
>> Good night, everyone.
>> Thank you. Thank you for being online
with us. We Okay. All right. We're
ajourned. Thank you.
>> Thank you, everybody. Bye bye.
Oh god.